It is currently Wed Nov 13, 2024 11:29 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 46 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 7:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 91883
Location: To the left of my post
DAC wrote:
long time guy wrote:
DAC wrote:
Warren Newson wrote:
For someone who has not been on the Chicago airwaves for damn close to six months Jason Goff certainly gets a lot of attention around here. If the level of interest he generates on this board is indicative of his popularity with the wider community, ESPN 1000 would be foolish not to hire him. He would be the most important sports radio personality in the city.


This is bullshit. Many of us have enjoyed Goff's fall from grace and like rubbing it in the nose of his delusional supporters. Don't confuse talking about him on a forum to wanting to listen to his rambling sports thoughts and constant racial subtext.



He has been gone for 6 months and who exactly are his "supporters"?. There hasn't been an overt display of love for him and its obvious that McKnight hasn't been an upgrade and its debatable if Mac has either. Goff is still by far the most talked about guy at that station and he hasn't been around in 6 months. If the goal was to whack him then he has been whacked but some people just can't seem to let him go for some reason.


I see his supporters quite often on social media. You're right- not as much around here. McKnight is an upgrade but that is just an indictment of how awful Goff was. McKnight is extremely boring and has annoying mannerisms but at least for me they don't result in many PTFB moments. Hell, it was last August when I completely stopped listening to the afternoon show because of Goff. I don't expect that happen to the midday show even though I not much of a fan of the show. And Mac is light years ahead of Goff in every aspect.

Keep fighting the good fight against people who like a radio host!

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 7:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
DAC wrote:
long time guy wrote:
DAC wrote:
Warren Newson wrote:
For someone who has not been on the Chicago airwaves for damn close to six months Jason Goff certainly gets a lot of attention around here. If the level of interest he generates on this board is indicative of his popularity with the wider community, ESPN 1000 would be foolish not to hire him. He would be the most important sports radio personality in the city.


This is bullshit. Many of us have enjoyed Goff's fall from grace and like rubbing it in the nose of his delusional supporters. Don't confuse talking about him on a forum to wanting to listen to his rambling sports thoughts and constant racial subtext.



He has been gone for 6 months and who exactly are his "supporters"?. There hasn't been an overt display of love for him and its obvious that McKnight hasn't been an upgrade and its debatable if Mac has either. Goff is still by far the most talked about guy at that station and he hasn't been around in 6 months. If the goal was to whack him then he has been whacked but some people just can't seem to let him go for some reason.


I see his supporters quite often on social media. You're right- not as much around here. McKnight is an upgrade but that is just an indictment of how awful Goff was. McKnight is extremely boring and has annoying mannerisms but at least for me they don't result in many PTFB moments. Hell, it was last August when I completely stopped listening to the afternoon show because of Goff. I don't expect that happen to the midday show even though I not much of a fan of the show. And Mac is light years ahead of Goff in every aspect.



I keep hearing how great Mac happens to be yet most of the conversation on here seems to be centered on his partner and not him. Ratings haven't much moved at all and I can't recall one sports thought of his that has actually provoked discussion Meanwhile people are still dissing Goff over comments he made 2-3 years ago. Still discussing his Range Rover? for the love of god.

I'm not a Goff fan but if the goal was to get him launched and silence his voice then why bother to follow him on twitter? What sense does that make?

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 8:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72378
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
It's hard to take someone seriously who thinks McKnight is better at radio than Goff.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 8:29 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 55826
pizza_Place: Barstool One Bite Frozen
I think Range Rover was only one year ago because that was his comeback to Racist Score Caller #3582, which the Score promoted as the most important thing that ever happened in the history of the station. WE WILL NOT BE AFRAID TO USE OUR PLATFORM.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 2:28 pm
Posts: 3899
Location: Tinley Park
pizza_Place: zzzzzz
FavreFan wrote:
It's hard to take someone seriously who thinks McKnight is better at radio than Goff.


It is hard to take anything you say seriously considering your awful taste in many things.

_________________
Lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72378
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
DAC wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
It's hard to take someone seriously who thinks McKnight is better at radio than Goff.


It is hard to take anything you say seriously considering your awful taste in many things.

Sounds like a compliment from someone who thinks McKnight > Goff

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 11:19 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 55826
pizza_Place: Barstool One Bite Frozen
McKnight is worse at radio than Goff, but Goff gives you much more material to tweak him with. McKnight won a contest that was rigged for him and asks bad meandering questions like everyone at the Score. Okay whatever. That doesn't remotely compare to peeling away at the onion that is Jason Goff.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 12:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 2:28 pm
Posts: 3899
Location: Tinley Park
pizza_Place: zzzzzz
Curious Hair wrote:
McKnight is worse at radio than Goff, but Goff gives you much more material to tweak him with. McKnight won a contest that was rigged for him and asks bad meandering questions like everyone at the Score. Okay whatever. That doesn't remotely compare to peeling away at the onion that is Jason Goff.


Don't you think angering his listeners and literally getting them to turn off the show is worse for a talk show host than merely being annoying? Don't get me wrong, I am no fan of McKnight but I can and do still listen to the show. Overall, McKnight just doesn't make people as angry.

_________________
Lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 1:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 40596
Location: Everywhere
pizza_Place: giordanos
DAC wrote:
Curious Hair wrote:
McKnight is worse at radio than Goff, but Goff gives you much more material to tweak him with. McKnight won a contest that was rigged for him and asks bad meandering questions like everyone at the Score. Okay whatever. That doesn't remotely compare to peeling away at the onion that is Jason Goff.


Don't you think angering his listeners and literally getting them to turn off the show is worse for a talk show host than merely being annoying? Don't get me wrong, I am no fan of McKnight but I can and do still listen to the show. Overall, McKnight just doesn't make people as angry.


I would bet a lot this is one of the biggest factors to have made DeCastro's decision for him.

_________________
Elections have consequences.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 1:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
pittmike wrote:
DAC wrote:
Curious Hair wrote:
McKnight is worse at radio than Goff, but Goff gives you much more material to tweak him with. McKnight won a contest that was rigged for him and asks bad meandering questions like everyone at the Score. Okay whatever. That doesn't remotely compare to peeling away at the onion that is Jason Goff.


Don't you think angering his listeners and literally getting them to turn off the show is worse for a talk show host than merely being annoying? Don't get me wrong, I am no fan of McKnight but I can and do still listen to the show. Overall, McKnight just doesn't make people as angry.


I would bet a lot this is one of the biggest factors to have made DeCastro's decision for him.


You'd probably be betting wrong. DeCastro's decision was mostly based on him getting "his guys" in there. Someone either blogged about it or wrote an article about it and it made perfectly good sense.

"Angering the Callers" "SJW" and "Too much NBA" talk is just message board psychobabble. Paradoxically the same crowd that complained about the "SJW"/Non Sports talk portion of their show also complained about "too much NBA" talk also.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 1:47 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 55826
pizza_Place: Barstool One Bite Frozen
How is that a paradox when the NBA has marketed itself as the sports league of social justice? They're even letting players wear any shoes they want so they can "express themselves" (sell more shoes). No longer must feet be oppressed by the tyranny of matching!

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 1:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Curious Hair wrote:
How is that a paradox when the NBA has marketed itself as the sports league of social justice? They're even letting players wear any shoes they want so they can "express themselves" (sell more shoes). No longer must feet be oppressed by the tyranny of matching!


Was Michael Jordan a "Social Justice Warrior"? Did David Stern ever attempt to push or market him as such? Again this is message board psychobabble.

The vast majority of NBA players are African American. If a few of them seek to speak out about racial issues then that is their right. Also being against discrimination doesn't necessarily make one a social justice warrior either. Discrimination is actually against the law or do laws only count when illegals break them?

Allow them to wear their own shoes as a means of expressing themselves is also a stupid thing to say also.


If the NBA was as progressive as you and others keep claiming they never would imposed a dress code years ago. They also would not force players to speak following games. There are a lot of things that they aren't all that "Progressive" about. Most NBA fans aren't watching because of the "Social Justice Aspect". They watch because they "god forbid" "how dare they" simply like the sport.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 2:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2006 1:50 am
Posts: 11237
Location: Schaumburg
pizza_Place: Palermo's
Curious Hair wrote:
How is that a paradox when the NBA has marketed itself as the sports league of social justice? They're even letting players wear any shoes they want so they can "express themselves" (sell more shoes). No longer must feet be oppressed by the tyranny of matching!


That seems to be a very important issue to Parkins, McKnight, and Bernstein as it came up again today in transition. I don't understand how players being able to "express themselves" by wearing whichever shoes they want is going to make someone more interested in spending hours watching a sporting event. I haven't heard them acknowledge it's a way to try and sell more shoes, and they seem to think it's a great triumph of...something.

It reminds me of a little kid thinking they're "grown up" by being able to choose what they wear.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 2:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Tad Queasy wrote:
Curious Hair wrote:
How is that a paradox when the NBA has marketed itself as the sports league of social justice? They're even letting players wear any shoes they want so they can "express themselves" (sell more shoes). No longer must feet be oppressed by the tyranny of matching!


That seems to be a very important issue to Parkins, McKnight, and Bernstein as it came up again today in transition. I don't understand how players being able to "express themselves" by wearing whichever shoes they want is going to make someone more interested in spending hours watching a sporting event. I haven't heard them acknowledge it's a way to try and sell more shoes, and they seem to think it's a great triumph of...something.

It reminds me of a little kid thinking they're "grown up" by being able to choose what they wear.


The shoe thing has nothing to do with "expressing themselves". The NBA has always marketed individual stars. It was a way that they hoped to grow the league when it wasn't as popular. That is its history. This dates as far back as the 70's maybe earlier. Dr. J. Magic Bird all had their own shoes. It was part of the marketing, something which Jordan took to the next level. It wasn't about "expression" as much as it was about branding.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 06, 2018 3:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2015 5:44 pm
Posts: 331
pizza_Place: aurelios
So you're saying the shoe manufacturers are going to tell the players which shoe they can wear?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 06, 2018 4:13 pm 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 7:05 pm
Posts: 12441
I'm not as familiar with the NBA shoes story, but isn't this somewhat deaf/ignorant to the fact that while a player may have a message on his shoes about some social injustice, aren't the shoes themselves being manufactured in bad conditions with very low wages? Is it ok if the player is making millions of dollars from a shoe company that doesn't treat it's workers well?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 46 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group