@JulieDiCaro: Just to clarify, when I said sports radio is last bastion of the frat boy, I meant the industry, not my station. Just want to be clear.


Of course that's what you meant. You meant every other station that you aren't familiar with - not the one you experience everyday.

There is not a damned thing wrong with people who are bull shitters.

This circular aspects of the Julie DiCaro story are very simplistic. It's the same people, talking to the same people, about the same things. Wash, rinse, repeat. Over and over and over. Other than talking about herself and how hard it is for her, what else of significance has she "reported." Shannon Ryan to DiCaro, DiCaro over to Sarah, Sarah to someone else in the coterie, Ryan to that person who then goes back to DiCaro. The coup to the latest story is getting Peggy Koszinski to give a few quotes without allowing her to further expound.

Ironically, by mentioning Peggy they undermine the whole premise of their argument. Peggy is not the most telegenic woman, who has made her mark in the Chicago market for her TV sports coverage. I've met the woman, like her (a lot), and respect what she has to say. In 2000 she moved from radio to TV?
I didn't remember, my how time flies. Does Shannon/Julie talk about the barriers that Peggy faced (like radio personalities commenting on her appearance on a daily basis)? Do they recognize her tenure? Career track? Or professionalism?

The problem for this now clichéd argument of thier's is that they believe that because they are a woman, they should be accepted at point blank. Peggy has covered broad topics with great aplomb. She is respected and accepted. Why? Because she has put in the work! Just like the many, many women in sports that I follow on Twitter, both acknowledged in their field and those who (not unlike Julie) want to break into the field.

Mitch Rosen will always get a pat-on-the-back from Julie's cadre because he hired her. His statement of being open to anyone with passion rings faint when one consider's that the FOTS only gets passionate about things not about sports (his partner repeatedly proclaiming to not watching sports is self-explanatory). Larry Holmes is probably the best example of someone with a modicum of talent and a passion for sports, and yet he isn't well recepted by many on this board. Why? Well why should he be?

Julie is approaching her one year mark in breaking onto the WSCR scene. In that time aside from talking about her Twitter escapades, what else of note would she or could she point to with any sense of accomplishment?

Oh, poor Julie.

This is just dumb. She has no formal training and a very poor resume to be deserving of a spot as a radio host. If she had went to journalism school and worked her way up then maybe. From what I can tell, she one day "decided" she didn't want to be a lawyer and instead wanted to be a sports talk person and she's been handed a bunch of undeserved jobs in radio over many other people both male and female that actually have worked their way towards it.

Add in the fact that her brand seems to be openly and stubbornly antagonistic to pretty much everyone who listens to The Score and she is lucky she even has her job.

Well Mac told me to to tell you to go FUCK YOURSELF!!! ..So now it's been said .. .

This circular aspects of the Julie DiCaro story are very simplistic. It's the same people, talking to the same people, about the same things. Wash, rinse, repeat. Over and over and over. Other than talking about herself and how hard it is for her, what else of significance has she "reported." Shannon Ryan to DiCaro, DiCaro over to Sarah, Sarah to someone else in the coterie, Ryan to that person who then goes back to DiCaro. The coup to the latest story is getting Peggy Koszinski to give a few quotes without allowing her to further expound.

Ironically, by mentioning Peggy they undermine the whole premise of their argument. Peggy is not the most telegenic woman, who has made her mark in the Chicago market for her TV sports coverage. I've met the woman, like her (a lot), and respect what she has to say. In 2000 she moved from radio to TV?
I didn't remember, my how time flies. Does Shannon/Julie talk about the barriers that Peggy faced (like radio personalities commenting on her appearance on a daily basis)? Do they recognize her tenure? Career track? Or professionalism?

The problem for this now clichéd argument of thier's is that they believe that because they are a woman, they should be accepted at point blank. Peggy has covered broad topics with great aplomb. She is respected and accepted. Why? Because she has put in the work! Just like the many, many women in sports that I follow on Twitter, both acknowledged in their field and those who (not unlike Julie) want to break into the field.

Mitch Rosen will always get a pat-on-the-back from Julie's cadre because he hired her. His statement of being open to anyone with passion rings faint when one consider's that the FOTS only gets passionate about things not about sports (his partner repeatedly proclaiming to not watching sports is self-explanatory). Larry Holmes is probably the best example of someone with a modicum of talent and a passion for sports, and yet he isn't well recepted by many on this board. Why? Well why should he be?

Julie is approaching her one year mark in breaking onto the WSCR scene. In that time aside from talking about her Twitter escapades, what else of note would she or could she point to with any sense of accomplishment?

Oh, poor Julie.

Laurence Holmes is a fucking weirdo, a nerd in denial, and a wannabe. Not a very good radio host either.

@JulieDiCaro: Just to clarify, when I said sports radio is last bastion of the frat boy, I meant the industry, not my station. Just want to be clear.


Of course that's what you meant. You meant every other station that you aren't familiar with - not the one you experience everyday.

I hope someone points that out to her. What a buffoon.

Well Mac told me to to tell you to go FUCK YOURSELF!!! ..So now it's been said .. .

I didn't know that there were any Jewish fraternities. Thought the whole tribe was one big frat.

Sammies?

Yes.

"15 years as a criminal and family court lawyer"

Reporting isn't just accepting every statement uttered in an interview as objectively true. Her own public resume indicates about half that number of years were spent as a lawyer. A very little bit of digging is likely to reveal even less substantive experience. It's also important to note that her very shallow experience in criminal law was all spent on the side of defense....but she is an expert.

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

She receives derogatory tweets on a daily basis, as many as 30 per day,

slow news day... really slow

From the guy who always sounds creepy when women broadcasters join his show.

I can't stand her because she comes off as a retard on twitter... and she has terrible sports thoughts... the one time i heard her on a weekend - her bulls thought was they need to be relevant until baseball starts, thanks Julie cant wait for you to get a full time gig.

slow news day... really slow

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

I bet Leery takes off his wedding ring to talk to girls on the radio.

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

Then there's this eunuch

James Neveau (@JamesNeveau)
6/21/16, 9:26 AM
Hmm. Let's see. @JulieDiCaro is amazing. @RegressedPDO blows my mind. @SarahSpain's work is always powerful. twitter.com/MissStaceyMay/…

There is not a damned thing wrong with people who are bull shitters.

I think Julie being terrible job is a bigger board unifier than anything else. I can't think of another topic that is pretty much unanimously agreed upon here.

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

Who are these women not listening to sports talk radio because men are hosting shows? And if there is such a large number of women who would otherwise be listeners of The Score but for the number of penises in the daily lineup, is it not unreasonable to think that a similar number of men would go to another station or outlet if more women were driving shows?

What Julie and her ilk really want is a station to adhere itself to their "untapped" demographic (I'm skeptical of the notion that a random sampling of females would be just as likely to regularly listen to hours of sports talk as a similar sampling of males), at the cost of an established one. It could be that there is a bit of a market inefficiency as far as the female demo goes, but to act as though attempting to capture it won't drive male listeners away is disingenuous, as is lambasting men who do so (but not the women that won't listen to men talk sports and take calls).

Furthermore, didn't Shannon Ryan co-host with Julie DiCaro once or twice? If she did and my memory isn't betraying me, shouldn't she have disclosed this lest anyone think "oh, this is just Julie DiCaro getting a co-worker to write about her in the Daily Tronc"?

I think Julie being terrible job is a bigger board unifier than anything else. I can't think of another topic that is pretty much unanimously agreed upon here.

I rarely troll.

This is just dumb. She has no formal training and a very poor resume to be deserving of a spot as a radio host. If she had went to journalism school and worked her way up then maybe. From what I can tell, she one day "decided" she didn't want to be a lawyer and instead wanted to be a sports talk person and she's been handed a bunch of undeserved jobs in radio over many other people both male and female that actually have worked their way towards it.

Add in the fact that her brand seems to be openly and stubbornly antagonistic to pretty much everyone who listens to The Score and she is lucky she even has her job.

We lose a lot of rights when we look the other way when it doesn't affect our lives or it isn't a cause we agree with.