Ok, let's get the crayons out. My thesis was completely validated in your third paragraph, and it's OK for you to enjoy the safety of "random guest", points to a simple mind, but as usual I find myself fighting a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent, so we can delve into the mindset displayed a bit here.

There are many times that callers would verbally eviscerate the hosts, of course the hosts/screeners must have the ability and confidence to venture into such debates, and for folks like yourself they are apparently uncomfortable, so maybe better for your mental wellbeing that they have gotten away from taking frequent callers.

Now you do realize that the "random guests" you love so much are not really random, but are carefully selected jabronis that are in lock step with the hosts ideologically. Sorry to embarrass you lil' fella, but you are making a straw man argument so weak that a fart in the wind would blow it over.

Let's go on and delve into the odd interpretation of the very concept of talk radio, which would seem to require different voices talking about events, it is not called soliloquy radio or lecture radio, the very name seems to require different voices and opinions.

Let's get into the base pack of crayolas because I may have pushed you out beyond your skis a bit...the callers modify the cadence and energy level of the show, which is a necessary ingredient to most, likely not for you as you likely are sitting with your pants down around your ankles as Danny Bernstein drones on and on and on unchecked about the evil Tony LaRussa, but most find that mind numbingly boring.

There ya go bud, had to dumb it down a bit, but as they say you always teach to the weakest student in the class.

1. Which posters here "are terrified of open debate and people that have the audacity to have unique thoughts?" Name names and explain how you reached the conclusion.
2. Which posters here "hate it when the hosts or callers actually disagree?" Name names and explain how you reached that conclusion.
3. " There are many times that callers would verbally eviscerate the hosts." How often have you heard that done well? How often have you heard it done at all in the last 15 years? You very publicly announced your move to ESPN 1000. Do you hear it there?
4. "Sorry to embarrass you lil' fella, but you are making a straw man argument so weak that a fart in the wind would blow it over." You're the poster boy for weak straw man arguments and it's nice to be recognized by the master.
5. "Likely not for you as you likely are sitting with your pants down around your ankles." Classy. I didn't take it to a bitter personal level, but you did. Well done.
6. "The callers modify the cadence and energy level of the show." You're right. I know "cadence" and "energy level" are the two top things for which I'm looking in a sports talk show.
7. "The very name seems to require different voices and opinions." The only person in this debate who can't handle different opinions is you. I told you I didn't like callers and, for having the temerity to disagree with you, you accuse me of jerking off to Dan Bernstein.
8. The irony in all of this is that if someone put on the show that you so desperately miss, the exact same show that was aired during the glory days of the 1990's, you probably wouldn't like it. You would probably find that you, like most of the listening audience, has moved on. Yet, you're still here pining for it over and over again.
9. For that matter, why do you feel the need to repeat yourself over and over again? Yes, we know you think all millennials are stupid. Yes, we know you think Danny Parkins knows nothing about football. Yes, we know you think the 1990's were the greatest era in the history of radio. Yes, we know you prefer callers to guests. Do you have anything else to say about anything?

Listened to B & L Steve Stone interview which I always enjoy. Bernstein after gave a teaser about sports media the next segment. It was about lack of content, unlikable on-air people, and mandated opinions on national ESPN and FS1. Have to hand it to them for nerve coming from 2 guys who've helped bring down the once mighty Score with lack of content, sjw talk, and being highly despised by listeners themselves.

I expect proper APA citations from now on when you steal my stuff.

The fact that you don't get energy level and cadence as being important is silly, this is a primary component of every show, why do they have planned segments?

The rest is just a dude whining about being exposed as a jabroni (RIP Iron Sheik)...it's what I do here.

Gonna start charging you rent for living in your head lil' feller and I don't work cheap.

Somebody like Ozzie and beat writers are fine, but I have no interest in some doofus from The Athletic or god forbid, Cody Decker. I have no clue why that's better than callers.

I got a little ticked off Claw, but you're alright in my book. Also, you do have some excellent football thoughts. I mean that sincerely.

Today Leery said he is a geek, not a nerd, because he knows how to talk to women.

Larry... dude... you do not know how to talk to women. I've heard they way to talk to lady guests. It's disturbing.

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

They are all just like his little sister.

_________________

_________________

man I wish I would have heard that. What an idiot

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

Leila shows up to the studio and suddenly Larry becomes his awkward giggly self. Such a strange little man.

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

She is like a sister, RFDC!

Hes such a bad host as well. The fawning over him by other media is crazy. He should be on overnights, or hosting House L to all 8 people who listen to it.

Larry Holmes was very close to being a MLB player.

Who's the interviewer here? Team Bernstein water-carrier Jeff Agrest?

_________________

Half the guys at a pro day could not make the throw from short to 1st? Lol what???

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

Larry sounds like 3/4 the guys I played hardball at McKinley Park in 1990.

_________________
Elections have consequences.

Yeah.

This is one of those classic things in life where the story gets embellished as years go by.

The first lie in this thing was when Larry said he was "invited". No. That wasn't the case. Clearly. That would mean somebody scouted Larry. That didn't happen. This was simply an open tryout for anybody.

Because if it's an invite it would mean that you were scouted. And no scout would invite a bunch of guys where they can't make a throw from short to first.

Eliminating guys for speed might have been a lie by Larry as well. Because it doesn't make sense that they would eliminate guys before they could see if they could hit. That's what Larry said. Hitting is really the main thing scouts were looking for in this damn thing. MLB is loaded with slow guys that can mash.

But Larry claims if you couldn't run this thing in 8 seconds you were gone. Says this was before hitting. I don't believe it happened that way.

Yeah this was definitely an open tryout. No one is getting sent home after one drill if they are asked to show up. Plus at an open tryout catchers are not getting sent home, they need to catch for the pitchers.

_________________

This is how it was back in the day. Invites for regional tryouts went to pitchers and catchers. Everyone else it's just open tryout. Now, Lawrence fancies himself a catcher, right? If he was invited, he wouldn't be taking ground balls with the schmucks who couldn't throw a ball 120 ft on a line.

Another lie by Larry. He said they had to run the 60 yard dash in 8 seconds. Said they ran from 2nd to home. That's not 60 yards. That's 127 feet. Which means 42 yards. Any healthy 20 something baseball player can run 42 yards in 8 seconds. Even Konerko. So no way half the guys were cut after that. No way. They made that part easy to where only a cripple would be cut.

What's with the lie saying it was a 60 yard dash?

In fact, I remember when Larry first told this story. He said it was an "open" tryout.

Now that he's 50 and trying to impress the kids the story becomes "invited".

Hell, when Larry hits 80 he will be telling people he played in MLB.

90 feet to third then 90 to home is 180 feet. Which is 60 yards.

_________________

Wasn't Larry part of the group of young producers that discovered and exposed Mike Murphy's gush praising fake emails. Kenny Owens from Lagrange emails really came from Murph's wife's account. Murph was humiliated on-air. Ironic Larry's "crowning glory" tryout story is riddled with mistruths.

The Murph hate was always interesting because it seems highly likely numerous shows have done the exact same thing over the years.

If you listened to Murph you could tell he was an odd duck, but at least he was able to fill a two hour solo show with unique content while Larry struggled mightily to come up with content for his two hour solo show.

This also points to the fact that nothing really entertaining or unique has been created on the station for the past 10-15 years, why else would they need to continue to go after Murph and North who have not been at the station for quite some time.

I agree, I am maybe one of the few who liked Murph's shows. I even won tickets to Tony and Tina's Wedding from the show, once upon a time.

I did too. They were sooo bad but good.

Bernstein wouldn't have had a comfortable career going up his own ass about NBA assistant athletic trainers if North and Murph hadn't built a solid audience on their lowbrow mass-appeal pap.

_________________

I don't know his exact age but Sir and I are contemporaries. I had friends who went to the "invite" tryout every year so I have a little bit of insight.

Let's first give this context. Larry played on a club team at Depaul. He wasn't some college player on a varsity team with cuts and scholarship athletes. One of their big rivalries was the club team at Loyola U. I and a couple of friends played with Loyola U upperclassman players during the summer when we were sophomores/juniors. They were about the level of a kid who was good but not great in little league. I don't think any of them played varsity in high school and they were starters at Loyola. We were four years younger than them and objectively better players, and I was no star in high school. Sir did play in high school and I think his team was decent, so you could see where he might be the best or near best on that Depaul club team, but that didn't mean he was at a level where any professional would notice him. I doubt scouts would have even wasted their time on that level...and you have to remember that college baseball has dramatically increased in quality in the last 20 or so years. High level college was a secondary option to even being drafted low by the pros back in those days.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

but getting to the "invite" tryout

The Royals and the Expos (who became the Marlins) were well known at that time for finding 1-2 extra players through these regional tryouts back then. If you remember, they made a movie about some teacher who made the Rangers after somehow having a 95+mph fastball return to him in his mid 20s.

They might have invited some people but they were invited in the sense that you were in a group of 100 or more others and it was open to anyone. My friends went several years. One of them was a LHP who was able to walk on at U of I, so there were people with far better credentials than Sir who knew this was really just for fun than an actual tryout.

Basically, they were looking to see if you had one elite skill they could polish into a real MLB player. So, it did go like Sir said. They ran you first and cut at least half. It went kind of like Sir said, except they weren't scouting the actual production, they were scouting the speed, arm strength and swing. They didn't care if you were a HR hitter or a line drive guy, they were scouting your swing.

Pitchers didn't do all those drills and obviously, they needed catchers for the pitchers. Pitchers pretty much got a few pitches and anyone who didn't hit a certain speed was automatically cut.

Long story short, these were yearly gang bangs hosted by a couple of teams to see if some talent fell through the cracks post draft. Sir is the only guy who thinks it was a real tryout.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.