Radio Racket's "Stump the Roscoe" is boring

[Ladytalk]

I like the show, especially when they are talking about radio. I also think their comedy segments are very funny.

However, the current "Stump the Roscoe" game is sophomoric, in my opinion. It seems like they are playing to a few people on their mesage board. I turn it off when they do this, as I'm sure many people do.

They finally put the RJ thing in perspective and now this silly "game show" just drones on and on.

Who cares what songs the guys knows or doesn't know?

 

[DToTheJ]

To your point that the game "drones on", you'll be happy to know that we've limited the number of songs played each week for the game to 10.

As far as the game "playing to a few people on their message [sic] board", I would actually call it an interactive game, inviting others to play along and even submit what songs they'd like to stump him with. (And as "music director" of the segment I still allow instant listener suggestions should some come in.)

I'd imagine most who dislike the segment are not privy to the beauty of the game: Roscoe, with his vast radio experience, has had a keen ear to many formats over the years, yet the possibility of mistaking an artist of a song he should know for someone completely different is more often than not (e.g. last week, when hearing the opening to Jane Child's only hit from 1988, he confidently misguessed Debarge.) In short, outside of the occasional softball, he's hit or miss, which is what makes the game so unpredictable. Last week alone, I got a 5 out of 10 score, and I just picked the music! (Although winning the "STR" Tourney isn't necessarily an honor I'd wear on my sleeve...)

I invite you to give the game another chance this week. If you enjoyed "Name That Tune" growing up, this game should be right up your alley once you're aware of the concept.

- D.J.

 

[Ladytalk]

Sorry, D.J., but this snooze fest in no way resembles Name That Tune. Again, in my opinion.

Again, who cares, outside of 5-10 people who IM you or are in the chat room when the show is on. And for the replay, it's deadly. There's a reason why most game shows aren't rerun that often.

Hey, I enjoy your Cockroach and the rest of the show. But STR sounds like college radio, bad college radio. And now that one of the denizens of the mesage boards has dared to express a negative opinion, Mr. Brusstar will run it forever, just to show me.

Well, I guess he showed me. Now, I can't wait for some of the regular listeners to trash me. Yeah, they'll show me, too! (A few of them are VERY predictable!)

 

[gatsby1922]

I agree with Ladytalk. "Stump the Roscoe" is weak and goofy.

 

[DToTheJ]

Now, I can't wait for some of the regular listeners to trash me. Yeah, they'll show me, too! (A few of them are VERY predictable!)

Hey, I'm a textbook example of a regular listener of the Racket - so tell me, were you expecting a barrage of abhorrence rather than the persuasive well-thought-out response you got from me?

Like you, I thought the game was a bad idea, only because it ran way too long. (Although in their defense, it was the weekend between Christmas and New Year's, and the "hit counter" was admittedly not as busy as it is on the average week.) But then I looked deep down and understanding the concept that some of the artists of songs he should know, coupled with the responses he gives when he does get them wrong.

Keep in mind that the bit actually is a spinoff of the game that GB plays at the Audubon Ale House with Roscoe during his "Sports Rock Showdown". When you're importing a brand to another medium, clearly there are some kinks to be worked out. While the bit may never have as lasting an impression on the show as R.J. has (or even Rockin' Rob for that matter) again, it's interactive when it is live, and was tailored to have entertainment value while on replay.

And going back to what you were saying earlier about "putting the RJ thing into perspective": It's been said on the show that they're trying to veer away from the "you give us 122 minutes, we'll give you RJ" formatics. The "STR" idea (and correct me if I'm wrong) was likely drawn up as a replacement for the RJ-allotted time in the long run.

Please don't think I'm trying to sell the bit because I'm one of its cogs, or because of my relationship with the show, but do take my response as one from a listener standpoint, and of one only asking you to give the bit another chance, since you may not be aware of the new 10-song restriction if you turned off the show like you mentioned before.

And if George, Kyle or even Roscoe wants to add their two cents, I can assure you they will most definitely not throw some "predictable trash" your way. After all, you're a listener, and the listeners are what make the show. Hey, maybe they'll retire the bit after this month and bring it back seasonally, who knows - it will be up to the listeners to determine that. Or you, as listeners, can tell us exactly why the bit isn't as desirable as you'd like it (or as gatsby1922 attests, is "weak and goofy") - is it the delivery, the music selection, should the name of the game be changed to "Stump the Brusstar"? I am proud to say this is one of the few shows that listens to its listeners, so your suggestions will not fall on deaf ears, I assure you.

And thanks for your time, Ladytalk. Thanks also for your kind words on the "Cockroach" as well.

 

[Ladytalk]

D.J.,

I appreciate your eloquent response. However, I find this game to be lacking any elements of a true game show to make it the least bit entertaining.

You're trying to "stump" a twenty-something dimwit. There's no challenge, no "big" prize, no empathy for the contestants. And the fact that it's being replayed over and over again, excluding any of the weekend audience who might want to participate (although I don't know why), just adds to a listener's frustration. Surely, there are better things to do than berate someone who seems incapable of defending himself.

Sorry, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

[Those RRRRs]

And now that one of the denizens of the mesage boards has dared to express a negative opinion, Mr. Brusstar will run it forever, just to show me.

Let me tell you about Mr. Brusstar. When The Hawk made the switch from Classic Rock to Jazz, he parleyed in sentence after sentence about how there was little or no difference between The Hawk and WMGK.

He droned on and on about how he and only he was correct and then had the unmitigated gall to dare anyone to disagree with him on this board. After no one disagreed at first, he proceeded to claim victory later that same day in a childlike manner by writing, "I told you so. No one will disagree with me!"

I took the statements from his original post one by one and respectfully explained to him why his arguments were fallacious. Instead of responding or agreeing to disagree, his puerile ego must have been vitiated because his only defense was to whine on his show later that night about how I attacked him personally (I did no such thing) and call me an a--hole.

Very brilliant and scholarly Mr. Brusstar. You get a D- for credibility in my book.

 

[BRUSSTAR]

However, the current "Stump the Roscoe" game is sophomoric, in my opinion. It seems like they are playing to a few people on their mesage board. I turn it off when they do this, as I'm sure many people do.

"Stump The Roscoe" absolutely is sophomoric. No argument there.

But you're incorrect about its "playing to a few people". That certainly isn't the intent, and for the most part, the response has been good. It's just a bit-- one that'll be played each week thru the month of February. The winner gets a T-shirt. That's it. I'm sorry to hear you're not enjoying the segment, but am glad you still like the other stuff. I can, however, reveal that "Stump The Roscoe" has had zero effect on our listener count. It hasn't helped, but it certainly hasn't hurt. There has been no measurable tune-out when the bit comes on, whether on the live show or the replays. If "many people" as you assumed turn the show off when the segment begins, we'd see this almost immediately with our hit counter.

And for the replay, it's deadly.

And the fact that it's being replayed over and over again, excluding any of the weekend audience who might want to participate (although I don't know why), just adds to a listener's frustration.

Replayed "over and over again"? The weekend replays are offered as a convenience; they're a service to those who don't care to stay up until 3AM every Friday night. Never was the intent for someone to listen all weekend long, to the same five hours over and over. I try to catch as much of the replay as I can over the course of the weekend, just to hear how we did. Once I've heard something, that's it for me.

Your comment about listeners wanting to participate, to me, makes no sense. If they want to participate, TOO BAD-- IT'S A RERUN! Weekend listeners know it's a taped show when they tune in. We've been doing this every Friday night for almost a year now, with the only exception being a lone "Best of" show in early November. These aren't the 1930s when live radio shows would be re-performed for audiences in other time zones! (And even those were only re-done once.) Anyone who wants to participate in "Stump The Roscoe" has to be listening live-- there's nothing I can do to change that! Besides, why aren't you concerned with the "audience frustration" regarding the regular conversation and interviews? Wouldn't it be just as frustrating for listeners to our weekend replays not to be able to participate in conversations about radio, or not to be able to call-in with questions for our guests? How is "Stump The Roscoe" any different? I'm not trying to be argumentative, but I am quite confused over that one.

And now that one of the denizens of the mesage boards has dared to express a negative opinion, Mr. Brusstar will run it forever, just to show me.

Well, I guess he showed me. Now, I can't wait for some of the regular listeners to trash me. Yeah, they'll show me, too! (A few of them are VERY predictable!)

At first, I respected your differing viewpoint. Then, your comments about the "replay factor" seemed odd but still interesting. But your comments quoted immediately above are nonsensical, unnecessary, and to me, completely undermine the rest of your case. I don't even know who you are, and haven't even participated in this thread until now. Why the sudden "attack mode"? "Dared to express a negative opinion"? I've said it before, and I'll say it here-- I don't care. We said all along the bit was going to run each week thru the month of February. That schedule will neither be shortened nor extended as a result of your comments here. I don't program to specific individuals, and never have. (That's why I generally believe playing listener requests is programming suicide.) Sorry, but I'm not "showing you". I don't even know who you are, but I do indeed appreciate the other nice things you've said about the program in the past. If after roughly 200 unique live hours of The Radio Racket the only things you didn't care for were the RJ bits and "Stump The Roscoe", then I must say, we're probably doing something right overall for you. (I love eating at Arby's but think their Jamoca milkshakes are disgusting, know what I mean?)

Let me tell you about Mr. Brusstar. When The Hawk made the switch from Classic Rock to Jazz, he parleyed in sentence after sentence about how there was little or no difference between The Hawk and WMGK.

He droned on and on about how he and only he was correct and then had the unmitigated gall to dare anyone to disagree with him on this board. After no one disagreed at first, he proceeded to claim victory later that same day in a childlike manner by writing, "I told you so. No one will disagree with me!"

I took the statements from his original post one by one and respectfully explained to him why his arguments were fallacious. Instead of responding or agreeing to disagree, his puerile ego must have been vitiated because his only defense was to whine on his show later that night about how I attacked him personally (I did no such thing) and call me an a--hole.

As if any of this had anything to do with the topic here (which is "Stump The Roscoe Sucks", not "Things I Attacked Brusstar For For No Reason Several Months Back"), please know that I didn't bother responding to your lengthy madman ramblings because, quite frankly, to me, you just weren't worth my precious time. To those reading this now who have no idea what we're talking about, and think I'm sounding like an incredible a--hole now, feel free to go back and see the thread in question should you have absolutely nothing better to do. I trust you'll understand why I didn't waste an hour addressing someone who instead of engaging in thoughtful debate devoted considerable time to analyzing the fact that my punctuation marks often follow rather than precede closing quotation ones (which I do and always have purposely done-- not out of ignorance, as I'm well aware of "the right way"-- because I do like to stand up for what I think is right every now and then).

http://www.radio-info.com/smf/index.php/topic,54641.0.html

So Mr. RRRRs, when I fail to respond to whatever follow-up comment I'm sure you'll have here in mere hours, please know that's it's simply a business decision (time is money, and to me, you're not worth losing either) and that it has nothing to do with my ego ("puerile" as it may be-- great word, by the way).

Very brilliant and scholarly Mr. Brusstar. You get a D- for credibility in my book.

Brilliant, yes, but I've never claimed to be "scholarly". So your "D-" may as well be an "F"; I'm not taking your course. My Professor is Russell Johnson, not you...

Anyway, enough of that...

Look, many of you have said you're digging "Stump The Roscoe"-- you'll get to enjoy it three more times. Some of you can't stand it, and you'll enjoy knowing that it's being offered "for a limited time only". We obviously can't please everybody every day, but as long as you're still enjoying the Racket as a whole then I invite you to keep coming back. When we start sucking, the hit counter will tank, and our overall listener hours will go down the drain. And we'll either change things or stop doing the show altogether. But the hit counter continues to rise each month. And for that, we are all most grateful.

P.S. -- And since the subject is "Stump The Roscoe", I just wanted to recognize Diamond Joe for his efforts in the careful (it is somewhat scientific) song selection and clip isolation. If you can't stand hearing the ramp of "Thunder Island", blame him!

 

[Ladytalk]

Sheesh, I wish I had your kind of time to reply...or pontificate..., Mr. Brusstar. Maybe a little less replying and more updating the show's website?

No "attack" as you claim. If there had been, the moderators would have, in the best tradition of Barney Fife, “nipped it in the bud." I was merely stating fact that you come off as the knower of all things radio-related and seem to be incapable of accepting criticism of any kind.

The bit is stupid, in my opinion. Trying to stump "Roscoe" is like trying to stump a stump, except the stump would have more of a sporting chance, and probably more clever things to say. I'm glad it has a nil effect on your hit counter. The 5 to 10 or so people on the IM and chat room obviously love it. Scientific song selection? Great, you have things in perfect perspective.

Who am I? We have worked together in the past and may I say you haven't changed a bit. I can't wait to see how you chop this up with your "quoting" expertise, to make many more points that drone on and on.

 

[Those RRRRs]

As if any of this had anything to do with the topic here (which is "Stump The Roscoe Sucks", not "Things I Attacked Brusstar For For No Reason Several Months Back"),

That's funny. But with all due respect, I didn't attack you at all. I did something for which you too are notorious. I took your post bit by bit and explained why I disagreed. I believed your arguments were fallacious and I explained why I thought so. You should recognize an attack when you see one, Mr. Brusstar. You've demonstrated that your ability to attack those whom you dislike is far more illustrious than most on this board.

As far as it having nothing to do with the original topic, you know as well as anyone that it is commonplace on this forum for one to start a topic and for that topic to go in a different direction. Your point is moot.

please know that I didn't bother responding to your lengthy madman ramblings because, quite frankly, to me, you just weren't worth my precious time.

I like the madman part. That too is funny...but the "precious time" bit is weak. No one on this board pontificates more than you, Mr. Brusstar. And that puerile (glad you like it...it's one of my favorites too) ego of yours is so apparent that it is appalling. It's always worth your "precious time" to disport your extensive knowledge of the radio business to others, and it is especially worth your "precious time" to derogate anyone here who dares to challenge you.

But when such a person does demonstrate legitimate and valid disagreement, and you find yourself unable to entertain such disagreement with your own veracious evidence and/or conclusions, you riff through an attack or two and then run away like a scared puppy with his tail between his legs. That, Mr. Brusstar, is why the "precious time" bit is weak. I can site numerous examples of this both here and on your show, but you aren't worth my precious time.

I trust you'll understand why I didn't waste an hour addressing someone who instead of engaging in thoughtful debate devoted considerable time to analyzing the fact that my punctuation marks often follow rather than precede closing quotation ones

That was after the fact and you know it. The post to which you cast considerable doubt about my "thoughtful debate" had nothing to do with your quotation marks. It is pretty funny though. When you told me to learn the "quote" feature I didn't realize that you were referring to the "quote" feature on this board. I thought you were attacking MY punctuation, which is why I, in turn, attacked yours. Perhaps I taught you a little about proper punctuation, you certainly taught me to solicit information about Radio-Info's "quote" feature...and for that I thank you.

(which I do and always have purposely done-- not out of ignorance, as I'm well aware of "the right way"-- because I do like to stand up for what I think is right every now and then).

Kudos to you Mr. Brusstar! After you've organized the Punctuation Parade down Market Street please let everyone know date and time. Julius will need ample warning to repetitvely remind everyone here on the board about this unprecedented event.

So Mr. RRRRs, when I fail to respond to whatever follow-up comment I'm sure you'll have here in mere hours, please know that's it's simply a business decision

I'm fine with that Mr. Brusstar. You are free to respond in either a thought-provoking and provacative manner or you are free to have drawn your blood and run. I don't care one way or another. It's your business decision, not mine.

Brilliant, yes, but I've never claimed to be "scholarly". So your "D-" may as well be an "F"; I'm not taking your course. My Professor is Russell Johnson, not you...

I don't teach any courses, Mr. Brusstar. But if I did, I would have taken a new protege by now. You didn't learn anything the last time I demonstrated your philistinism in the area of drawing cogent conclusions and supporting those conclusions articulately and factually. For your own benefit though, ask Professor Johnson about this subject. I'd be curious to hear his scholarly opinion about your brilliance in the subject of inanimated name-calling.

but I've never claimed to be "scholarly".

That's too bad. I don't care what you think of me or what unique pseudonym you give me on your show. In your field of radio knowledge and with your ability to effectively communicate that knowledge on The Racket, I can't think of a better scholiast.

 

[RoscoeBrowning]

Man, you people are brutal! But at least you're listening... and by posting about us, you're getting the word out about the show... and "Stump the Roscoe" in particiular. Now many people who haven't heard it are going to wonder what it's all about. Many thanks!

By the way, I'm a 31 year old dimwit.

 

[wprt949]

i Like the bit its funny



If you dont like it Listen to some other S***

 

[RoscoeBrowning]

Tell 'em Mike.

Hoo Hoo.

 

[MikefromDelaware]

Humor is a personal thing. Some folks think the humor of Jackie Gleason and Art Carney in the Honeymooners is a real riot, to borrow a phrase from Ralph. Others think it's stupid. Same for The Three Stooges. Some folks think those guys are great and others think they are idiots. Same with modern day comics like Ray Ramono and Chris Rock, etc. So it isn't surprising that some folks find the Stump the Roscoe bit boring and others think it's great.

As with any radio or TV program if a part of the show bores you, tune out for the few minutes that Stump the Roscoe is on and come back later. If enough folks do that my guess is , George and company would drop the routine as they apparently can detect how many listeners they get at any given time during their program. If you like the routine, be sure to stay clicked on during that part of their program. In either case, that will tell them if the bit works for enough of their listeners to be a viable part of their show or if it has a very limited appeal in which I'm sure they'd drop the routine.

I guess that is one advantage to webcasting. You can tell how many folks have clicked on and if they actually stay clicked on. You get instant feed back.