interesting. i wasnt aware they knock you out for a colonoscopy

_________________
'Your AT&T Universal Card has arrived'? Oh God, Kick-fucking-ass, I got a Master Card! I don't believe it, man. Life is kinda cool sometimes.

They go either way. I've been semi-awake and knocked out.

_________________
Wattabout Kodak Black?

Orly?

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014

He later clarified he is not a nerd, but a geek.

_________________

Larry Holmes 25th anniversary at the Score is being celebrated. His tiny content highlights of course involves riding the coattails of other hosts.

1- Terry Boers (Mac too?) pronouncing Laurence Holmes.
2- Telling Murph stories
3 - Telling Les stories

That's it...

are they just going to play portions of celebrations for other people and then discuss those?

_________________
'Your AT&T Universal Card has arrived'? Oh God, Kick-fucking-ass, I got a Master Card! I don't believe it, man. Life is kinda cool sometimes.

_________________

Joe Ostrowski did come from his tree and has become a well known, national sports betting expert. I believe Toni Gill is now a big time producer or something to that effect. Lawrence is very proud of his tree.

He also perfected the art of using his show to replay interviews or press conferences from the day before. Great way to host your show, but take nice breaks during it. That's become a part of his new show with Bernstein.

Also, he has helped turn the station into a liberal, SJW culture. I'm sure he's very proud of that.

Jay Mariotti took a shot at LoHo in his column about LA Times interns:

"Before I am massacred as a white supremacist and Trump-lover — I identify as a centrist — let me first say I’m a champion of diversity. I was the one who cringed on days when our TV producers, who filled out the lineup for ESPN’s “Around The Horn” debate show, would invite three other white males to join me and a white male host. I’m the one who never looks at color or gender when it comes to meritocracy, such as when I often describe the Washington Post’s Sally Jenkins as the best sportswriter going, and when I’ve praised Jerry Brewer from her staff and said Michael Wilbon deserves a multimedia career achievement award. Male or female? White or Black? I don’t care. Write me a great sports column, as Bill Plaschke does at the Times, Nancy Armour does at USA Today and Marcus Thompson II does at the Athletic. I’ll also speak up when someone isn’t worthy of the column gig, such as Laurence Holmes, a Chicago cheerleader and media social climber."

“I never look at color or gender. Also, I cringe around the whites.”

_________________

Who's he crappin'?

_________________
Wattabout Kodak Black?

Is there a Larry and Marioti feud that I have forgot about

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."

I think there's a Mariotti feud with just about everyone in Chicago, based on reading his substack columns for a while

Nowhere near as entertaining as J Hood lighting up Teeee-lander on air.

Only someone like Jay Mariotti whose career has fell on hard times, now not fearing the ramifications, would dare give a honest critique of Larry Holmes. Anyone with a bright future, goes against their beliefs, bites the bullet and rubber stamp praises him.

Gee, I wonder how Mariotti fell on hard times. Bad luck?

_________________
Wattabout Kodak Black?

Anti Italian bias

_________________

_________________
Wattabout Kodak Black?

They used to think that they could plug in sportswriters as hosts, especially columnists and it would result in good sports talk radio, it worked sometimes, but failed spectacularly with a few guys, most notably Mariotti and Telander.

I know a lot of people that post here are terrified of open debate and people that have the audacity to have unique thoughts, but it was a staple of the station in the early days and went on until it became corporate owned.

Some of the peeps here can stop reading because this concept will blow up their world view....OK, for the adults still reading, when you hear people with two drastically different viewpoints discuss and defend their ideas you can actually learn something by listening to other viewpoints and you may actually gain perspective! What a novel concept!

This type of give and take quickly exposed Telander and Mariotti as crackpots, sadly now the crackpots are protected by useful idiots who quickly try to stifle and actual discussion of issues.

Come on now, you know that's not an accurate statement.

Hmm...have you ever read some of the comments? Some people hate it when the hosts or callers actually disagree, not sure how you do sports talk radio when everyone always agrees on everything?

Don't know if you heard, but words are violence. Can't be having heated debates, it's ....uncomfortable in drive time.

_________________
Wattabout Kodak Black?

I dunno, I thought the chat between Neil from Northlake and Da' Coach was delicious drive time fun.

Of course.

_________________
Wattabout Kodak Black?

I can't recall anyone ever posting that they don't like it when there's disagreement between the hosts or between the hosts and the callers. However, I can recall many people posting that 9 out of 10 calls tend to suck and they aren't interested in hearing more of them.

Which led to the resurgence of Laurence Holmes career.

He owes his entire radio existence to Hood.

_________________

Interesting take, but let's unpack this a bit.

So your saying that 4 hours of Bernstein and Holmes droning on and on and on about Tony LaRussa is preferable to a 10% chance on thirty seconds of entertaining radio.

Not to mention the fact that it is highly likely that a vast majority of the supportive texts read on air are simply a modernization of the Murphian "Kenny Owens Concept", so your basically getting only the thoughts of 2-3 people for four hours, again, hearing another voice for 30 seconds seems preferable.

Find it interesting that Mike Murphy is still mocked on the station, yes he was an odd duck, but he did do some oddly unique stuff and was actually able to produce enough content to fill a show unlike Larry Holmes who struggled mightily to do a two hour solo show.

Not sure if I buy your thesis statement, seem there are numerous variables you did not consider.

This is also interesting to me. Years ago on a weekend working around the house etc Murph was stuck on my radio. Not being a Cub fan and him over that top must mean he had something going on. Larry, on the other hand would get me to listen but generally only after another show and not long. His constant replaying of his previous stuff and other show interviews were terrible for all day listeners.

_________________
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.

Your first statement- "I know a lot of people that post here are terrified of open debate and people that have the audacity to have unique thoughts..." I point out that this statement is nonsense. In reply, you don't bother to defend the statement, and move on to your second statement.

Your second statement- "Hmm...have you ever read some of the comments? Some people hate it when the hosts or callers actually disagree." I point out that I've never seen anyone on this board state that they don't like it when the hosts disagree with one another or with callers, but there are plenty of people who don't like callers. You don't try and defend this point, but instead move on to your third point.

Your third point- to summarize, callers are good and you want more of them. I don't agree with your point, but at least it's defensible. I don't want to wade through caller after caller either regurgitating the hosts' point or being unable to defend themselves after the hosts take a shot at them, to get to that one call where someone can both articulate and defend an original thought. The odds are just too low. Give me a random guest over a random caller any day of the week.

Hire Claw to screen and the problem is solved.

_________________
Wattabout Kodak Black?