Jump to content


Member Since 23 Jul 2013
Offline Last Active Today, 02:22 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Marty on with Francesa at 4:00

Today, 02:22 PM

I'm not an everyday listener, but I'm not going to lie...I do listen to him a couple of days a week, much for the same reason that you and BP do. And to get some Mets/NFL stuff.

Mad Dog really did cover up for a lot of Francesa's ills. Dog is a much better solo listen...I'm not saying Dog didn't have his issues, but Mike's way of making a point is to stammer something out and then repeat it in a slightly different way 10 more times. I remember a pranker asking Mike would it will be like to make the Hall of Fame for Stammerers and Repeaters (or something close to that). Mike then stammered about how he's never stammered in his life. Dog was considerably more articulate and better at expanding on an idea, which is kind of scary when you think about it. He also actually had a sense of humor about himself.

A lot of the reason Mike is a terrible interviewer is because he's too concerned with showing both the interviewee and his audience how much MIKE knows, so very often his guest will start to tell a story that Mike may have heard or have some familiarity with...then here comes Mike to trample all over his guest's recollection with everything HE'S heard or witnessed about the anecdote. It's really a serious form of insecurity: "See? See? I do know stuff, I know lots of stuff! I'm not as clueless as people think I am!" What makes his show kind of entertaining for all of the wrong reasons is that he has no idea what a joke he's become...and what's even funnier (or sadder) is that there's actually people who still think he's great as what he does.

agreed 100%. I know mike is pretty bad overall but as BP said, he stirs the pot and gets reactions. I guess I don't really listen to him as much as have him on as background noise- out if his 5 hour show maybe there is a good half hour of material, I can especially laugh at some ridiculous callers.

In Topic: 2015 Draft Thread

Today, 02:18 PM

Or - you do what smart teams do and you trade down a few spots and get a prospect or some more picks. If that kid falls to 7 you better believe teams with defensive needs will come calling.

I'm not sure nhl draft picks are as valuable as say nfl draft picks. If you trade down 5-10 spots from 7 to like 15, what is the return like? In the NFL that's at least another first and second plus some more. In the NHL I don't get the feeling that the return would be worth it, I'd rather draft a player like hanifin who is as close to a sure thing and trade one of our a prospects.

And yeah it's highly unlikely he falls to us but we have over 3 months to fill here lol.

In Topic: 2015 Draft Thread

Today, 11:55 AM

If we're at 7 and hanifin is there do we take him or do we reach a little for a forward from that second tier?

Or is hanifin just that good that he won't fall to 7... I'm remembering Larsson falling to us since everyone wanted the top forwards.

In Topic: Marty on with Francesa at 4:00

Today, 11:02 AM

You nailed it. That is a big part of it. I grew up with the FAN, so it's a nice reminder of "days gone by", Keeps me connected to the tri-state area.

agreed, I'm in the same boat. I listen almost everyday at work because here in DC it's only Skins, Nats and a little Caps. That's hard for a mets/giants/devs fan to take. Mike was much easier to put up with when Russo was there but I still like to listen to the show to hear some of the callers.

Also mike is one of the worst interviewers ever.

In Topic: Zidlicky to Det

02 March 2015 - 02:03 PM

Perhaps this ends up bumping up our chances for McDavid by a couple of percentage points when it's all said and done.

not if severson is back to take zids place.