If we did, will they visit? And possibly answer some of them?

We ask questions of our cherished (!) radio guests. It's our way of making you feel welcome here. While we discuss salaries...

_________________
Middle Aged Crazy, like Uncle Terry

Matt, I think this will answer that question.

Honestly, asking anyone what they make is just stupid and wrong. I have seen it with posts to Rock and others and what business is it of anyones?

1)What does it matter that Jesse had a gig as a part-time Blackhawks host? Is that position supposed to somehow disqualify him from consideration for much more lucrative, full-time hosting positions? Obviously not. And if it did, that would mean Laurence, too, is disqualified from such consideration since he has been the full-time Bears reporter for the past three or four years. So in this case, your logic is doubly flawed.

2)Why is Hanley not a good example, as you claim? You said experience as a sub is an important factor in determining who will be selected for a full-time spot. I cited Hanley as an example because he was an original sub at the Score and was still leapfrogged by many others before he got his chance to become a full-time host. His Sun-Times position is irrelevant because he was clearly vying for a hosting job, but was passed over for more than a decade.

3)When you point out that Bernsie was a "backup that rose quickly", you are supporting my argument and undermining your own. Clearly, sub experience hasn't been an important factor when management has conducted past searches for full-time hosts. Talent, as you say, has been much more important. And Laurence, as we both agree, is lacking in this area.

4)Again, Bernsie preferring Laurence over drinky means little because it's quite possible neither will be considered for the afternoon spot if it opens. Mitch may choose to bring in outside talent (like Mac) or promote a host who is already full-time (like Mully). And even if the finalists for such a spot are drinky and Laurence, I would think Mitch will ultimately decide who fills the position, not Bernsie. Allowing Bernsie to choose from a few different options for substitute co-host is simply not the same thing as allowing him to select a permanent co-host during afternoon drive. To think otherwise is to turn a blind eye to the reality of broadcasting economics and corporate power relations.

_________________

Ok. Let me make this clear. I don't think it hurts his chances that Bernsie chooses to have him to sit in with him.

My commentary was on Larry. I was commenting on how he acts while with Bernsie. I think he believes he needs to gush over and show reverence to Bernsie.

You might be right. Maybe Mitch will do whatever he wants. I just think Larry is trying to do whatever he feels will land him with Bernsie if and when the great Terry Boers retires. I think it's very apparent when they do shows together. It's also apparent when Larry does solo shows because he becomes a bad imitation of Bernsie.

It would be nice for Larry to have Bernsie as a friend. Maybe Mitch will go to Bernsie and say "what do you think of Larry?"

Better for Larry if Bernsie says "He's a pretty good host. I like working with him" rather than the opinion most listeners have of him.

This thread has far too many long-winded points to wade through (and I even enjoy a well-constructed point).

I'd say that the Bernstein/Holmes dynamic is fatally flawed in that they both bring the same major weaknesses to the table (arrogance/narcissism, justified or not), and no show can overcome two hosts in that same vein. So anything other than those two...please!

I agree that Larry kisses Bernsie's ass when they're paired together. I also think he imitates Bernsie--poorly as you say--whether he's flying solo or is paired with Bernsie. Bernsie seems to realize this, too, and grows impatient with Larry's mimicry at times. That's when he really punishes Holmes. In some respects, then, Holmes's obsequious disposition towards Bernsie may prove to be his undoing.

In any event, my impression is that Bernsie likes Larry socially, respects his Bears reporting, and is trying to help his career. Laurence once described Bernsie as a mentor, and I think that's the role Bernsie is trying to play by letting Holmes host with him. The fact that Bernsie embraces his position as Holmes's mentor does not, however, mean that he wants to be paired with Holmes on a permanent basis. Bernstein has a shrewd critical intelligence, and I'm sure he realizes that Holmes isn't yet ready for prime time--and, in fact, may never be. So while he's willing to help Holmes's career along, I don't think he'd be willing to risk income or career status to propel Holmes even further forward. And that's precisely what assenting to a permanent coupling with Holmes would mean. I'm quite certain Bernstein would prefer a permanent pairing with Mully, whom he has liked and respected for over a decade.

_________________

[quote="Fixed Glee"]This thread has far too many long-winded points to wade through (and I even enjoy a well-constructed point).

I'd say that the Bernstein/Holmes dynamic is fatally flawed in that they both bring the same major weaknesses to the table (arrogance/narcissism, justified or not), and no show can overcome two hosts in that same vein. So anything other than those two...please![/quote]

Agreed. I think Bernstein recognizes this, too. He seems to like fixating on his personality differences with Boers (primarily by magnifying Boers's weird, creepy side) to generate creative tension. His shows with Holmes possess tension only when Bernsie pummels Holmes for failing in his imitation of Bernsie (particularly Bernsie's intellectualization of sports or sports culture). I would think Bernsie would prefer a pairing with North to a permanent pairing with Holmes.

_________________

You might be right. Bernstein might view it that way. I think Bernsie would love to go solo and not have to split the show's value with a partner. He knows he carrys the show and people listen for him. He could get Terry's money in addition to his own if he proves not to lose listeners.

I know Bernsie thinks he could be a success as a solo host. I wouldn't doubt that he could. He would rely more on guests if he were in that format.

Bernstein's best partner was and will always be The Ultraback Raymont Harris. Damn those two did some good radio back in the days.

While I don't think Bernsie likes Hanley too much, they have done some really funny shows together, too. And when Bernsie did Bears pre-game with Buffone, they were awesome together.

_________________

Midget, you're very perceptive with regards to Bernsie. Ultimately you might be right on.

I think he's friendly with guys like Drinky, Goff and Larry. I don't think he's friends with anybody at the station however. He'll amuse them but in the end he knows he's above them. Hell, they might not even realize that Bernsie doesn't consider them friends. Business wise it's best not to be friends with people in your industry. In the end he wants what's best for him.

Once again, I was just observing what I thought from Larry's perspective. How it would be advantageous, in his mind, to get in Bernsie's good graces. How he displays that while hosting with Bernsie. If we can see it then you sure as hell know Bernsie can see it. I do think he likes it a little. Everybody would. It feeds the ego. Somebody trying to impress you and kiss your ass. I'm sure Bernsie also thinks it's desperate and doesn't like being impersonated. In the end Larry's effort might not matter.

That Hanley is a seemingly unabashed Boers fan, and a better foil to Senor Crusty may say it all. I was long surprised that it wasn't the "Young Sportswriters" from 2 - 6 pm(Boers & Hanley)... though I was an early convert to Young Danny Bernstine....

_________________
There are only two examples of infinity: The universe and human stupidity and I'm not sure about the universe.

I thought Bernstein and Hood had great rapport on the air.

You are too linear in your analysis of Bernstein's future. I expect him to eventually make the switch to a place like WLS or WGN so that he can move to a general topics format with a different type of listener.

The discussion was a debate about Bernstein's power to program WSCR in the event of a sudden Boers retirement, not a projection of Bernstein's possible future career options.

As far as Bernstein's potential career progression goes, remember that he tried to make the jump to general talk a few years ago, but there was evidently little or no market for his "talents". I'm sure he will try to do so again, probably at WLS or an emerging FM talk station. Since Nick DiGilio is as edgy as WGN gets, though, I don't see him finding employment there in the near future.

_________________

I think Bernstein is a little to "edgy" for the geriatric crowd that listens to WGN, and a little too liberal for the audience that WLS seems to be shooting for. I mean, they run Limbaugh and Hannity shows on a daily basis over there.

5 year plan? I hope my future is at the Score as a full-time host.

I can't speak for any full-time host with regards to their contracts, but any host who has half a brain has a clause in their contract that allows them to have final say on any co-host. Any host can build that into their contract. From what I know, it's not too hard to get that into the contract. Hope that helps a little.

Dan doesn't read the message board. Dan and Terry would not respond if asked any questions here.

I thought Bernsie would have a say. Didn't know it would be final say. He's smart. If Drinky's right he'll have that in his contract.

Drinky, what's your gut feeling? How many more years does Boers want to do this? I say at least 5 more years. It's great money. Boers knows that. If he retires even he would get sick of going to the track every day.

Are you kind of pissed that Bernsie chooses Larry over you for sub roles? Maybe you wouldn't admit it but it has to be a little disappointing. Hell, you work with him 5 days a week.

Disappointing - yes. I always want air time. I understand it though.

My gut feeling is that Terry can do this for as long as he wants to. I hope he stays around for a long time....

I was thinking about the history of the Score. Back in the late 90's when they switched partners. Boers going with Bernsie and Mac with Jiggs.

Mac didn't have that "final say" clause in his contract. No way he would ever want to work with Jiggs. Hell, although it's turned out good, I doubt Boers would have chose Bernsie if he had final say. Both Boers and Mac wouldn't have allowed the switch had they had control. They loved each other like the Cowboys in Broke Back Mountain.

But times have changed and the station has grown. So maybe now hosts can get that "final say" clause.

Isn't that dangerous for a station. Couldn't the host just choose his friend or wife. LOL. It probably has to be somebody with broadcasting experience.

My five year plan is to boost pig iron production by 350% and wheat production by 900%. Onward, Stakhanovites!

I love you Matty!

_________________
I follow where my mind goes...

Why? I assume its because they dont like us because we can make our points here without them hanging up on us.

I would bet that Dan comes here alot, but to gutless to post a reply in fear that he might be proven wrong.

For the record Matt, I like your work and hope you get a full time slot there soon.

_________________

I'll bet Dan visits here. He's on the internet a lot. Looking for good articles to discuss on the show. I've heard him say he checks out message boards. The White Sox board and other places. I'm sure curiosity draws him here sometimes. He'd never respond to us and that doesn't bother me.

I tend to doubt the veracity of drinky's statements about "final say" for all the reasons you mention above. Boers and Mac didn't have it, and now North has become a huge problem for management because he does have it. Bernsie may have some influence, but "final say" sounds preposterous to me.

_________________

I tend to agree with you. Doesn't make sense for a station to give a host the ability to hire sombody at a 6 figure salary.

Why do you need a GM if that's the case?

I know there are stipulations on time slot moves. In the end the station doesn't have to give them "final say" on a partner.

The host will sign the deal if the money is acceptable to them. That's all they care about. They'll work with anybody as long as they have the money and/or years that they want.

Here is why it can't work. Problems would occur. What if Bernsie hand picks his partner and tells the Score to hire him.

What if the Score can't agree on money with Bernsie's hand picked partner? So Bernsie can say "Well, that's who I want so you have to pay him whatever he wants."

Or how about this. The station can screw Bernsie with his hand picked choice. They can just low ball the guy knowing he won't take the offer. They can do this if they don't like the guy Bernsie picked. "Well Bernsie we tried to hire him but he wouldn't agree to the money. Pick another one." They can keep doing it until they get the guy that they want. "Well, that's the 3rd guy you picked Bernsie. Couldn't come to terms with him either. That's it. We're going with Larry."

Bernsie certainly won't have control of how much they pay his hand picked host. So the station can use this ploy.

The logistics of this type of clause doesn't work.

I think the "final say" would be more of a last resort rather than a handpicking device. For example, Muprh or Boers could use it to keep from working with each other. I don't think it's supposed to be a devise you use over and over until you are working with the person of your choosing.

Just ran across this during an Ultraback search. Thought it was interesting.

_________________
You know me like that.