Mike and the Maddog on WFAN versus Bill Mazer on WNBC in the 60s

[WCFLWLS]

Remembering Bill Mazer do a weekday afternoon drive sports talk show in the 60s on WNBC makes me make a comparison with sports talk today. The same frequency, 660 A. M., now WFAN, has been an all sports talk station for years. The stars of the station are Mike and the Maddog. While I think that Mike and the Maddog are knowledgable about sports, I see a difference in talent between what they are doing today and what Bill Mazer was doing in the 60s on WNBC. The main difference is that Bill Mazer seemed more literate, more educated and had a much better command of the English language than Mike or the Maddog. I think that the standards today are much lower than they were in the 60s when it comes to communicaton skills. Bill Mazer also had a great memory and could pull up many obscure trivia sports facts that I don't think Mike and the Maddog can do. One other thing, I think that Bill Mazer was more courteous to his callers and gave them each more time on the air to make their point. It is my opinion that Bill Mazer did the best regular sports talk show in the history of New York radio. If you also remember that Marty Glickman had a sports telephone talk show on WNEW A. M. for a while, he rates a strong second.

 

[jetfli]

Any of us who were listening to radio in the '60s know exactly what you are talking about. But there are some sports programs that still offer the same approach Mazer took all those years ago. For example, tune into WGFX Nashville's local weekday sports programming at http://www.1045thezone.com. You'll find it, just as Mazar pioneered, sports talk personalities that are more literate, more educated, have a much better command of the English language, have a great memory, can pull up many obscure trivia sports facts, are more courteous to callers, and give callers more time on the air to make their point. Much of the sports programming I hear out of NY, LA, Atlanta, etc., feature personalities that are trying to compete with the market shock jocks for attention. This same approach also comes across on the sports radio networks -- there's such a huge gap between the Zone's local programming and the Rome and Fox stuff in between that it makes the latter unlistenable. Give me the guys that talk seriously about sports, and can have some good fun with it, over the guys who assult my sensibilites with locker room banter. I'm tuning in for sports information and educated opinion, not juvenile trash talk.

 

[WCFLWLS]

I would also like to say that the single worst major market sports telephone talk station in the U. S. is KTCK, the ticket, in Dallas. The talk show hosts fail in every way.....obvious lack of basic sports knowledge, marginal English skills, they sound like redneck assholes, are more concerned about stroking their own egos than being professional, get off sports topics way too often and appeal to an audience with a third grade education. If you have any kind of education and have any feel for current sports or the history of any sport, you will think that these guys are idiots.

 

[wabc860]

For almost 17 years I have listened to Mike and the Mad Dog on WFAN and I listened to Mr. Mazer when he was on WFAN 15 years ago. Bill retains trivia & sports information pretty well but M & MD. have all the information you need when you call them on the air. They do not ramble off about the past and have the day to day knowledge. None better the protocol of Sports Radio Talkies Mike and The Mad Dog.

 

[CZT]

You're not going to find too many entertaining sports shows like Mike & The Maddog these days. I know there is a good one down in Atlanta, but I'm not sure what one it is. As for Mike & Chris, it's always fun to listen to them disagree on points--making Chris go nuts. That is great stuff.

I'm hoping to get myself into that realm--gotta deal with podcasting for now. At least the good news is that I have some of my sports commentary stuff online (www.crazytom.libsyn.com if you are interested) and I'm not afraid to bash my Phillies or Cowboys if I have to.

 

[little1]

I would also like to say that the single worst major market sports telephone talk station in the U. S. is KTCK, the ticket, in Dallas. The talk show hosts fail in every way.....obvious lack of basic sports knowledge, marginal English skills, they sound like redneck assholes, are more concerned about stroking their own egos than being professional, get off sports topics way too often and appeal to an audience with a third grade education. If you have any kind of education and have any feel for current sports or the history of any sport, you will think that these guys are idiots.

And if you look at Arbitron you'll find that they were #1 with PERSONS 25-54 in the last book. Not just men, but Persons. In other words, the demographic that most advertisers want.
So if they're the worst sports station in the US, how do you explain the ratings? Are the people in Dallas just THAT stupid?
And if they are, how do you explain that they've been the station of the year at ESPN's annual sports radio conference something like 5 of the last 7 years? Or that their morning show was just nominated for a Marconi (for the 2nd time) and the station as a whole was nominated for a Marconi as sports station of the year? Are they people at ESPN and the Marconi nominating boards just THAT stupid too?

Or is it possible that what you expect from a talk host and what listeners expect from a talk show host are completely different? Is it possible that while you think they should have basic sports knowledge, something above 'marginal english skills' and not sound like redneck assholes, listeners just want to be entertained?

After all, isn't radio supposed to be an entertainment medium? If they're #1 with persons 25-54 they must be entertaining somebody out there...I guess they're just #1 with idiots, is that it?