A Hearty Congratulations to BaD Radio

I had hoped to get something more substantial up for this notable accomplishment, but  .  .  .  failed.

Congratulations to Bob Sturm and Dan McDowell on their 5,000th show.

I was able to catch some of this today.  Was a kick to hear Gribble, that Nice Young Michael Gruber, and T.C. Fleming again.

On the one hand, the show's obsessive self-chronicling (do they have every show on tape?) is a little self-absorbed.  But forget that hand -- I'm really glad they take the show seriously and archive their stuff, keep track of show numbers, all the rest.  Keep it up, lads.   Whatever one may think of the show, it can't be denied that their show preparation is tops at The Ticket -- yes, topping even the Sainted Musers.

That shows respect to the listeners.

And we shouldn't forget that they turned down an opportunity for (it is said) more money to move to another station not so very long ago.  There's some love there.

I do worry that Bob will take his Large Sports Brain to more lucrative fields full-time (TV, behind the scenes with a network, play-by-play, sports journalism, books), so let's enjoy the team while we can.

A question for wayback P1s:  Don't The Hardline and The Musers each have more shows in the bag -- maybe not at their current time slots, but at least identifiably as the shows they still are -- than BaD?  I don't want to detract from the 5,000-show milestone, but, in the words of an immortal BaD staffer -- am I wrong here, guys?

Again, best wishes and for many more shows to come.

 

T.C. Fleming, Tickerman

Man, T.C. really hated this site and its proprietor, and did so for a long time.  I regretted this, but understood it.  He didn't have a lot of fans among the Confessors.  I thought he was OK at what he did, getting better as time went by, and I thought he would do well in Florida.  But likability over the air is a distinct talent, and T.C., while seldom outright unlikable, just didn't move the needle for most of us.  Or moved it to the left.

His biggest beef with MTC was that I declined to disclose to him the identity of the colleagues who had (non-anonymously) communicated to me certain unflattering information about his relationship with some of his colleagues and the regulation of his popping-on during a particularly heavy on-popping period on BaD, information I had used on the site.  I agreed with him that there was some unfairness to anonymous sourcing, but I wasn't going to breach confidentiality with my communicants.  This made him quite angry with me.  OK.

I remember the first time I ever heard an on-air reference to him.  It was Craig "Junior" Miller talking about some guy backstage at TicketStock, I believe it was, with whom he'd had some kind of inappropriate interaction.  Don't remember what Craig's problem was, just that he questioned what this guy was doing inappropriately interacting with him at TicketStock.   Can't recall anything specific, but I got the idea that he was never a Muser favorite.  May be wrong about that.

The man plainly had some gifts.  He worked hard.  Seemed to be a go-to guy for technical matters.  Kept Bob and Dan happy most of the time, not a skill to be sneezed at.  Had sportsy knowledge.  Worked at his Tickers.  Was prepared.

Many Confessors and, I suspect, many P1's, never forgave him for his gratuitously offputting remarks on his departure for Florida.  I believe that if that had never happened, he would not have ended up the lightning rod he became on his return.

My view was always that while all of the Ticket JV are intelligent and ambitious, T.C. just wasn't good at disguising the latter or his excessive pride in the former.  That on-air tone, and poor relations with his peers (remember that on-air dustup with John Fahey?), injured his prospects at The Ticket.

In the end, he was a Tickerman, and, I thought, a pretty good one.  He also popped-on with BaD, but that couldn't have been too satisfying.  He watched JV after JV with less seniority, some with lesser on-air gifts, leapfrog him into weekend and fill-in programming:  Justin, Mino, Eli, Machine, Jake, others. 

Not an attractive future, so his departure is probably a very good thing for him. 

Hey -- he was a Tickerman and he's got us all talking about him.  That's some measure of accomplishment.  He became Ticket-famous.

My Ticket Confession wishes him and his colleagues and investors every success.

Is There Tension?

I ask this question sincerely.  I invite daily BaD listeners to weigh in, because I've recently heard something on BaD that I did not expect to hear.

I have been able to tune into BaD twice in the last couple of weeks.  I regret that I can't listen more often, because I've kind of been warming up to the show over the past year or so.  But I did have a chance to punch in a couple of times recently.

Both times I heard a very tense moment between Bob and T.C.

T.C. would pop on.  Now, in T.C.'s defense, if he needs one, these pop-ons did not seem to me to be any more annoying than T.C.'s usual pop-ons.  You listen to BaD, you're going to hear T.C. pop on.  It goes with the territory.  One of them was a little sarcastic -- I don't recall the subject matter of either -- but well within T.C. historical tolerances.  Some people are OK with T.C.'s pop-ons, others less so, others not at all, but these sounded to me like not-out-of-the-ordinary pop-ons.  I did not take particular note of them, did not think T.C. was out of line in comparison with what he's apparently been allowed to do in the past.

But Bob took note and -- I don't think the phrase is "snapped at T.C."  I think the phrase is more like "expressed very distinctive annoyance at T.C. popping on, or perhaps at the said popped-on content."

In both cases -- my recollection may be a little thin here -- he paused before he spoke, as though considering his words carefully, or to signal that something unusual was coming.

In both cases, he called T.C. "Chuck."  Is that new?  Does he call him "Chuck" when he intends to make a slighting reference?

In the most recent episode he made reference to T.C.'s mic always seeming to be on.  In another he sarcastically -- the sarcasm was not veiled -- "thanked" T.C. for his contribution.

Dan did not speak during these uncomfortable passages.

In the most recent instance, Justin M was sitting in for Jake and had been participating in the show, although less than Jake usually does.  No interaction between Justin and T.C. during these passages (or at all).

I guess this could be a bit.  Again, I don't listen to BaD enough to know if this is some ongoing schtick, or if Bob is growing unhappy with T.C.'s always-bubbling-beneath-the-surface desire to participate in the show. 

Confessors, please -- this is not an invitation to unload on T.C.  We've seen enough of that in the past and we all know how you feel.  I mainly want to know if either Bob or Dan has been spatting with T.C. on the air, or whether what I heard on my two recent flybys was anomalous.

T.C., you're  .  .  .  you're so much more than banter.

The Uncertain Journey of T.C. Fleming /// LATER -- BREAKING BREAKING -- The Woodwork Speaks!! [See Following First Redhead]

Confessor Colorado P1 posted the following on the last thread.  I'm sure others out there heard it as well, but I did not.  His report:

Following up on some comments by others in one of the recent threads, I am one who is finding TC's increasing pop-ons increasingly annoying. Case in point: I think TC legitimately annoyed Bob yesterday during The 1:30 News and I completely understood Bob's frustration. Bob started to make a statement about the planned obsolescence of light bulbs and iPhone batteries and TC immediately jumped in to say "this is the worst opinion you have." The conversation went on from there with Bob eventually saying "I'm so sorry I exhaust you TC" and TC responding "your arguments are just so bad!" Bob then ended it with: "Mic' off, get ready for your Ticker . . . I'm just sayin' -- let us do our segment!"

Then at the end Jake declared "that was a bad segment" and Bob protested "no way, that was a fine segment, just a little discourse, an exchange of ideas." After the break they joked about it with Dan calling it "your large Apple argument of 2017." It was not the type of thing that will have a lingering effect but there were definitely some brief uncomfortable moments of tension and it was not a bit by Bob. It seems to happen more and more often lately, that TC will jump in to say something critical and one of the hosts will respond with what seems like genuine annoyance. Or that I will just find myself personally annoyed at his interjection even if nobody on the air reacts negatively.

I am a day one P1 of IJB so I have never been a TC hater and I still have no problem at all with his role at the station. I think he has clearly improved his Ticker performance and I generally enjoy his Tickers. It just does seem as though he has been given increased license or has just taken the initiative to jump into the hosts' conversations more frequently and I can understand why reaction of the good strong P1 is not always positive.

==============

In the recent past I have noted that when I was able to catch BaD I thought T.C.'s popping on had perhaps been moderated (or crowded out by Machine's incessant and truly annoying p.o.), and I thought some of it was even useful to the conversation.

But I would have punched out if I'd heard that.

I think T.C. is at a crossroads at The Ticket and may be feeling some frustration.

Consider:

With the fadeout of Shake Joint and Machine's departure, there are several slots to fill on the weekend.  This only comes around once per total solar eclipse, so everyone's trying to read the tea leaves as to who will get these plums.  (Wow, three weak cliche-metaphors in less than two dozen words.  Time to hang it up.)

I am not a heavyweight T.C.-basher, and I have zero inside information, but I would be a little surprised if T.C. got any of those spaces.  In the past, T.C. has filled in a show here and there with one or another of his colleagues, and my recollection is that those shows were not at all bad, but his appearances in that role seem to have vanished.  I can't recall hearing him as a fill-in co-host, either with an established host or an ad hoc fill-in show with another JV, in a long time.  I'm guessing that Jeff Catlin's email melts down whenever T.C. gets extended air time.  In any event, he doesn't seem to be a current go-to for the odd slot here and there, so as a candidate for a weekend posting he's down-list.

I'm also guessing that maybe, just maybe, with the exception of Jake, his JV colleagues may not be anxious to share a show with him.  He would steamroll Justin M worse than Machine did.  As I've written in the past, every host and JV hopeful at The Ticket has ambition and a large ego.  T.C. is not unique in that regard.  His problem is that he is not good at disguising it.  He gives off a vibe that he believes he is the smartest guy in the room, but seems tone-deaf to the fact that (a) it's a very large room full of smart guys and hundreds of thousands of smart listeners, and (b) he's the only one  thinking that.  His treatment of superiors who disagree with him is inapt (see above), and peers -- forget it.

So -- wild guess -- I don't see The Ticket assembling a weekend show with T.C. as one of the co-hosts.

And I suspect he doesn't see it, either.  Makes him testy.

But I have a suggestion for the Man of the Cat, which I offer for my customarily modest commission:

Give T.C. his own weekend show with no co-host.

I would absolutely check that show out and give it some time to percolate.

Lots of advantages; the guy is like a Norm starter kit:

       (1)  It would make T.C. happy (if that's on Cat's to-do list).

       (2)  It would keep in place the general expectation that seniority will be rewarded by being given a chance to shine.

       (3)  The CTO only has to pay one guy and fill one slot.

       (4)  He will always be prepared with content.

       (5)  He will be contentious with callers.

       (6)  He will be free to let his ego-flag fly; his less attractive broadcast qualities will become advantages rather than irritants.

       (7)  The Ticket is assured of weekend controversy.

       (8)  He will have no co-host to whom unattractively to condescend or to bully.

       (9)  If it succeeds, you've got a new star; if it fails, the perpetually nagging matter of T.C.'s career path is finally resolved, and we can all move on.

       (10)  Appropriately scheduled, people will tune in just to catch the Craig Rosengarden/T.C. mixer (can you imagine the e-brake fodder that would explode out of that?).

You're welcome!

All right, all right, here's your redhead.

BREAKING BREAKING:  TICKET T.C. LOWDOWN

OK, Confessors, going out a bit on a limb here, so bear with me:

It is possible I'm getting scammed big time.  Please keep that warning in mind as you consider the following:

I almost never, ever hear from Ticket employees at any level.  I consider that a compliment to The Ticket -- employees are generally happy there and not trying to grind any axes on this site.  That speaks well of management.  (I know, I know, everyone thinks I kiss CTO ass, but think about it:  If you worked for a large organization (I do), and there was some guy out there doing a blog dedicated to your organization, and you were disgruntled, wouldn't you grunt, at least anonymously, to the keeper of that blog?  Sure.  My organization gets slammed from within all the time.)

But I may have touched a nerve with this column.  I've heard from multiple (claimed) sources via email.

Now let's keep in mind that there are readers who do not like T.C. Fleming one bit.  We hear from them frequently.  It could be they're pretending to be insiders and giving me crap.

But these communiques have the ring of authenticity.  Let's see if I can summarize fairly:

(1)  Current scuttlebutt is that T.C. is not presently agitating for a weekend gig.  If what Cat has told this site in the past -- that he listens to JV pitches when there's an opening -- is correct (some insiders have scoffed), it tends to suggest that T.C. will not be invited to co-helm (or, alas, solo helm) a weekend presentation.

(2) Perhaps the reason is this:  Your Plainsman's surmise that T.C. is not viewed as a desirable showgram co-host by his peers is correct.  (Make a note:  Correct Plainsman surmise.)   He is rather clear that he regards the other JV and most of the weekday hosts as deficient, compared to him, in broadcast skills and intellect, and have leapfrogged him for reasons unrelated to their on-air merit.  If pressed, he might concede a small advantage to Bob, Dan, and Gordon.  My correspondent was rather more colorful in his rejection of the notion that T.C. could pair with anyone.

Again, in fairness, we need to consider the potential axe-grinding factor here.  Do not want to be unfair to T.C., who has no opportunity to respond to things like this -- but this site would be delighted to hear from him and give him a forum for reply.

(3) Station is buzzing that management came down rather firmly on T.C. this week and advised him to cease his interruption of the hosts.  I don't know if this was before or after the episode Colorado P1 sketched out for us.  Again -- hearsay.

That's how I'd sum up what I've been told since this column appeared.  Take it for what it's worth.

And thank you for shopping at My Ticket Confession.

After all this, I think we need another redhead:

 @Plainsman1310

ThePlainsman1310@gmail.com

So What's the Deal with All This Tension?

And during the feelgood holidays, at that?

Let's review:

Mike Sirois v. T.C. Fleming:   T.C. holding forth at length on some aspect of coolness relating to cleats, and Sirois just flat sutting him down.

T.C. Fleming v. John Fahy:   I heard that exchange this morning at the beginning of That Certain Shake Joynt.  T.C. took his "competently produced" shot, and Fahy absolutely unloaded on him at his next opportunity, noting T.C.'s history of occasional marblemouthedness during Tickers, his BaD Radio sycophancy, and other sins.

Jake Kemp v. Unidentified Shake Joint Guy:  I missed the first few minutes of the show, but it sounded like Jake was wrapping up some fairly specific put-down of someone working on the show that morning, but I got in late couldn't identify the victim of his wrath.  Please advise if you know who it was.

Gordon Keith v. Mike Sirois: About Mike's mother, no less, and what I gather was speculation on her sexual history.  I caught just a little of this on Monte + The Machine yesterday so might not have that quite right -- corrections welcome.  (Those M+M boys do like to stir things up, don't they?)

Jake Kemp v. John Fahy:  After gently chiding his pal T.C. for his "silly" and "uncool" remarks about John, he noted that in listening to the latter's Top Ten work, he observed that Fahy would sometimes eliminate the actual punch line of the segment being featured, but sometimes include the 40-liner.   Tending to support T.C.'s judgment.

What's going on?  No idea; however, I wonder if it has something to do with the fact that the established hosts aren't likely to go anywhere for a long time unless someone retires early or dies, and you have a generation of JV that's been there a long time with no advancement.

The Ass Ceiling:  You keep these ambitious, intelligent guys down long enough with so very few opportunities to shine on-air, and the jockeying for position can become pretty intense.

Could be something else -- some event behind the scenes that's caused some lines to be drawn among The Next Generation.

 

I thought you'd enjoy a post that wasn't about advertising.

MTC Is Home to a Multitude of Viewpoints: Republican and Democrat, Cowboy-Lovers and -Haters, ISIS and Moonies, Jew and Gentile, Hardline-is-OK and Hardline-Irremediably-Sux, Same with Corby, Gordon's-a-Brilliant-Pulitzer-Shoo-in and Gordon's-a-Vag-Obsessed-Juvenile, but . . . .

.  .  .  can't we all agree that T.C.'s "Joel Klatt Theme Song" is pretty funny?

"You're cute, Joel, but you got those college playoff games hell wrong.  No jinj for you tonight."

Limited Sample Size

Before I get to a mini-review of today's BaD broadcast, I call to your attention that at least one Ticket on-air personality stops by for a cup of coffee now and then, because he sent me a redhead for your delectation and delight.

Slightly racier than my typical selection, but I thought it was very generous of him, and I thank him for dropping me a line.

*     *     *

My daily chores kept me in the Conestoga during much of BaD Radio today, so I got a good dose.   The lads were coming through loud and clear through the Crosley.

I thought it was very, very good.

Bob seemed relaxed and he made his points crisply and amusingly.  He didn't drone on or qualify every statement with something that sounded like he was trying to avoid committing to his point.  The guy is hard to beat on anything having to do with pro football.  I especially enjoyed his ripostes with Jake on football v. baseball.   I wonder if his co-hosting with Jake -- at least, that's how I interpreted what was going on -- who is pretty well-informed on things sportsy, whether or not you agree with him, sharpened up Bob's game.  All the flab seemed to have been trimmed from his remarks; he was sharp and seemed to be having a good time.

Jake's usually somewhat different viewpoints were expressed in an entertaining way, not smarty-pants or know-it-all.  I understand the point those who find too much Dylan-the-Argumentative-Teen in his presentation, but personally, I don't see it.  I can do without the politics, but I feel the same way about all the hosts on all the shows, so that doesn't distinguish him in a negative way.  I really liked his discussion of Adrian Beltre when they were discussing current fan favorites in Cool Metro.  

T.C.'s Tickers were crisp and error-free, and I can only recall once that he popped on, and even then he may have been invited to do so.  I didn't hear the whole show, but what I heard would never make me think that T.C. was some kind of ratings cancer as some Confessors maintain.

These impressions are not an implied knock on Dan.  I haven't heard big chunks of BaD in quite a long time.  Only saying that I thought the show was a refreshing change for me today, and made me want to try to find more opportunities to drop in again.

As I said, a pretty limited slice of a show that's on for 3.5 hours every day.  Just saying I liked it today.

*     *     *

 I let some comments through last time that, on reflection, I wish I hadn't.  I do a lot of comment review on my Note while on the run, so sometimes I'm not as reflective as I should be.  

Perhaps time to click through to the Rules of the Confessional for a refresher.  Remember, you can have a great comment but if it wraps up with a gratuitous shot, your journalistic efforts may be for naught.  

Thanks to all for your civil conduct on this site.

[Comments to this site are moderated. 

Before posting, please read 

 Rules of the Confessional.  Thank you.]

A Few Observations on Jeff Catlin's AMA, If You Can Remember Back That Far

Sorry I've been away, men and women.  Couldn't be hep'd.  Next little while I might be scarce again but will try to stay quick on reviewing comments.  Really appreciate your patience.  If, that is, you can even remember what it is I'm supposed to be writing about in the first place.

*      *     *

The one thing I keep coming back to is:  Jeff Catlin is a very smart man.  Yeah, I owe him one for the day he took out of his job to answer our questions, so you are forgiven for thinking I'm kissing his ass.  But I really feel that way, and I feel that it was revealed in his answers.

Various Confessors and other observers have remarked that Cat could hardly expect to agree with all the criticism that The Hardline, T.C. Fleming, Jake, Norm, BaD receive on this site and elsewhere.  Part of what makes any manager effective is the perception by his employees that he can be counted on to be loyal to them beyond the four walls of the workplace, and probably sometimes within.  So I don't begrudge him that, even though we suspect -- I do, anyway -- that he understands why some listeners feel the way they do.  That doesn't make him a hack, cowed by the high-priced talent he's expected to supervise and direct, long-time friends he's fearful of offending.  He spent a couple years down at KCMO (Kansas City, WBAP-type format) as PD, and got the PD job at Cumulus in Dallas after an interview process.   His duties have since expanded in a very competitive market.  This isn't the story of a corporate lackey, whatever we may think of his judgment in particular cases.

So when I mull over the difference between what most (not all) of us are hearing in those particular cases, and what he answered, I keep in mind that this is a knowledgeable media professional whose judgment is respected by the CTO and in the industry.  (See Catlin a Top 20 PD a Top 10 Market, Sez Radio Ink.)

(1) Ratings.

This is the key to all the rest.

Cat could not have been more clear:  It's all about ratings, and it's not about anything else.

The least important upshot of this is that nothing, absolutely nothing, on this site or the comments, or Reddit, or other Tickety boards, or emails to Cumulus, has the slightest influence on what happens at The Ticket as far as CTO decisionmaking is concerned.  So  no point in getting uppity about Cat paying not much attention to third-party criticism of program content.  He doesn't care.  He's not paid to create radio art.  He's paid to deliver ears.

The last half-year or so have seen a change in the relative ratings of the three DFW sports-radio stations, and sometimes even in their order.  While these changes do not portray the utter defeat of the Ticket, and they vary from book to book, it is pretty undeniable that as far as the ratings are concerned, there has been a certain leveling in the positions of The Ticket The Fan, and ESPN.

What follows from this?  And from the fact that Cat is not dumb (see above)?

We'll take a look at a couple of the individual cases below, but I think there are a few things that emerged from the AMA -- and I confess (of course) that I am somewhat reading between the lines here.  (N.B.:  I do not have any secret information from anyone at The Ticket; this is my own -- yes, the old speculation.)

First:  Cat isn't quite sure what's going on.  We can see from the successive books that the ratings are very changeable; other than the leveling trend, the ratings can vary considerably from book to book. 

Second, and related:  He doesn't actually believe the recent ratings dip is real.  That is, he doesn't believe that all of a sudden, the listening habits of Cool Metro have changed to the extent supposedly reflected in the ratings, or vary in the way the dancing ratings seem to suggest from book to book.  So The Hardline sucks one quarter and sucks less to a measurable degree in the next?  Doesn't make sense to him.  Should it?

[NOTE:  While this was in draft, DP and 444 Anonymous picked upon exactly the same things that I was thinking, with some interesting information to boot.  You may want to click back and check out their comments in the last string.]

Is there any factual basis for questioning the Nielsen/Arbitron books (Nielsen bought Arbitron in 2013)?   Maybe.  They're certainly having some problems in Los Angeles, where Nielsen withdrew one of the radio books in 2013.  (Nielsen Problems with Los Angeles Radio Ratings Panel.)  The "panel" is the group of citizens selected by the ratings service to be hooked up to PPMs -- personal people meters.  In June 2014, Radio + Television Business Report suggested that Nielsen's PPM problems were potentially nationwide, having to do with how PPMs were delivered to panel members.  (How to Fix Nielsen's PLM Problems Nationwide.)

Anything up in Dallas?  Haven't been able to find anything.  In 2008-09, Arbitron switched to all-PPM from the old hard-copy "diaries," which was a pretty large change in the way ratings were collected and which I believe did result in something of a dip for The Ticket, although nothing like the 2014 decline.  I do recall something -- was it a Confessor? -- about Nielsen representatives having been seen in the Dallas Cumulus Victory offices. [NOTE:  Anonymous mentions this in a comment to the last thread, so I guess I'm not making this up.]

But man, take a look at this, published just within the past couple of weeks on the Radio InSights website in an article titled "Radio Is to Blame for PPM Failures":

"Yes, Steve Morris, Pierre Bouvard, and others at Arbitron did a good job selling PPM insisting that it was more accurate, more precise, and radio’s perfect 21^st century ratings solution.  But let’s face it. Radio really really wanted PPM.  Radio wanted to believe it was more accurate. Radio wanted to believe it was more precise. Anyone who expressed doubt was dismissed as a luddite, someone opposed to progress.  Now we know that PPM is far less accurate and far less precise than Arbitron claimed. PPM’s fails to accurately capture radio listening, and quite possibly has done more damage than good to the medium."

So it is quite possible, perhaps even likely, that radio insiders are skeptical that ratings are accurately reflecting listening trends.  This accounts for Cat disbelieving that, for example, Mike's disengagement has materially damaged Hardline listenership.  If ratings are suspect, that causes guys like Cat and the Cumulus sales organization huge problems, because advertisers are still relying on ratings in making their buys. 

Third, I think there is something to what some Confessors have mentioned about changes in the competition and even the local sports scene.  Sure, the Cowboys have been around this whole time, but they had a shocking, newsmaking season last year.  In November of last year, two "classic" hip-hop stations entered the market (Boom 94.5 and Hot 93.3).   The Fan has been building its brand far more assiduously than The Ticket over the past few years, and maybe that is paying off.   This latter is a Cumulus corporate deficiency -- other than remotes, almost no Ticket promotion to the public -- not a Ticket programming problem.

I think some combination of things like this suggests to Cat that this just isn't a problem of program content, even though, as DP pointed out on the last thread, Cat does acknowledge that program content affects ratings.  Can it possibly affect it to account for the swings we're seeing over the last year?  It's hard to blame Cat for being skeptical.    

So no matter what Cat might really think about the shows, to tinker with what has been successful when the ratings were generally regarded as more accurate could be catastrophic.  And if the ratings are unreliable to begin with, how would he know if what he was doing was "working," was accounting for the better (or worse) ratings? 

I offer this as an explanation to Cat's "everything's fine with the shows."   The ratings give him no reason to think otherwise, and no guidance as to what changes are needed to make them better.

Now, let's ask ourselves:  Are the Musers a counterexample to this "the ratings are broken" theory?  They're still pulling strong, but I don't think this is necessarily evidence that declines in the appeal of other programs are real.  The Musers have a broader appeal generally.  Shifts in who's holding those PPMs are less likely to affect them.  For example, Mrs. Plainsman (who does not, to my knowledge, have a PPM) will gladly listen to the Musers with me every morning but will not listen to The Hardline ever.

Conclusion:  Cat must of necessity be guided by ratings, but there is some evidence that they're unreliable, and that this unreliability has either increased recently, or has reached some kind of breaking point since PPMs have taken over.  And he's not going to panic about program content under those circumstances.  The flip side of this is -- he doesn't know exactly what to do, since the sales department, and The Ticket's meal tickets, need to see ratings.

(2) The Hardline.

Cat views The Hardline as a stool perched on three legs of equal length.  Whatever he's hearing, he doesn't view it as associated with the ratings flipflops, as evidence of problems with the show.

Let's grant the latter point for now.

Many readers and Your Plainsman believe that in recent months, perhaps going back more than a year, The Hardline has declined in quality owing to (in order of cause-effect) Mike's too-frequent checking out and Corby's monopolization of the segments.  With the latter being unsatisfying owing to lack of preparation, discovering content on the fly, frequent repetition of a small number of pop-culture themes, low-info commentary on current events, browbeating of Mike, Mike not bothering to defend himself, and middle-school-level hyperbole.

I mean, it's right there.  You can hear it. 

Cat hears it too.  When he listed the items affecting ratings, program content was first on his list.  He doesn't care a lot about it, he doesn't view it as decisive when it comes to the ratings, but he knows the critics have a point, and so do Mike and Danny.   In recent months the show has been tightened up with segments ending when they're supposed to end (I know, it's for the whole station, but The Hardline was by galaxies the prime offender here).  Lately, also, Mike has come noticeably to life -- he's still the short leg on the stool, but the thing is wobbling less than it has been. And even Danny and Mike have been heard putting the kibosh on some of Corby's mic-hogging.

But there's more at work here in Cat's apparent unconcern over the quality of The Hardline.

To some extent, he approves of Corby's role.   The guy's a lightning rod; lightning rods attract lightning, and while no one wants to be struck by lightning, everyone wants to watch it.  In the past, I have likened Corby to Howard Cosell as an -- yes, an abrasive -- personality with an annoying voice people could not stand but whom they also could not stop watching. 

And here's a flash for all of us on MTC:  A lot of people like Corby, and Cat knows it. I am pleased that we've heard from several Confessors lately who are perfectly happy with The Hardline just the way it is. Despite the changes in the shape of the DFW market, The Hardline is still in first place in its market segment or within sniffing distance of it.

Who are these Corby likers?  (Well, I'm one, but we're talking about The OverCorby here.)  I don't have any numbers to back this up, but I'm thinking it's likely listeners who are  .  .  .  younger  .  .  . than the MTC demo.   Corby's not young, but he's younger than Mike, he sounds a lot younger than Mike (who is not that old, but looks and sounds older than he is).  And he's living the affluent kickass life that a lot of younger listeners probably find attractive.  And those young ears are the ones Cat covets for now and for the future.

(That paragraph could just as easily have been written about Jake.)

Cat's commentary has me thinking about the way I listen to The Hardline.  If I'm honest with myself, I have to admit that while there is more Checkout Mike and OverCorby than I would like,  the show is not that much worse than it used to be and I don't enjoy it that much less.  I think I probably am guilty of some good-old-days syndrome.  And I don't mean Hammer time, I mean the years after his departure when Mike and Corby, aided tastefully by Danny, were really working it.  When it wasn't at all clear that the Gregless Hardline was going to work.  While The Musers remain at the top of my list, I laugh out loud more at The Hardline.  I switch over to ESPN's Afternoon Show when I've had enough of what The Hardline's throwing out in a segment (Ben & Skin -- almost never; seems like every time I punch over they're playing one of their awful games, or about to), but The Hardline is still my default drive tunein, and after a little of Tim and MattI usually switch back.  And, as noted, there are listeners out there who find The Hardline's balance entirely acceptable.

So what I'm saying here is that there is a pretty fair chance that Cat does not view MTC, and in particular the commentariat, as representative of the views of the majority of Hardline listeners.  Or, more likely, he views the criticism one sees on this site is overstated.  And he may be right about that, although wrong to dismiss it entirely.

There's something else.

Everyone who might know a little about what's going on behind the scenes at The Ticket will swear that Mike will be Hard until they pry his cold, dead claws from his iPad, but he's not going to be broadcasting forever.   It is at least possible that the gradual takeover of the show by Corby and, to a lesser extent, Danny, is deemed preferable to a more abrupt changing of the guard.

And finally:

Mike loves The Snake.

So where does this leave us with Cat's attitude about the show?   He's going to defend his guys, and he did so in these pages.  But he knows; he knows.   To my ears, the show is inching back to some semblance of balance -- not there yet -- and I'm guessing this has more to do with Cat's professional suasion than it does with Mike's pride.

3) T.C. Fleming

There was a lot less T.C. questioning than I expected from Confessors, so Cat didn't have much to say about him.  That suited me.  So this segment won't have a whole lot to do with Cat's view on the lad, other than my guesses.

I don't believe that T.C. has much of anything, and quite possibly has nothing, to do with BaD's ratings.  Yes, Cat acknowledged that he needs some coaching up.  I don't think he's under any illusions about T.C.'s performance.

I personally don't find that performance terrible, but I don't listen to BaD as much as some of y'all.  He's not horrible on the weekend shows he sometimes anchors.  It's not a voice I like a lot, but that's cosmetics.  He's prepared, he doesn't browbeat his co-hosts, he's OK.  Maybe a little talky, a little balky.  But eh, it's the weekend.  He's kind of a guy.

I am very reluctant to doubt the sincerity of Confessors who criticize his performance, but I continue to think that a lot of listeners have simply never forgiven him the manner of his departure from Cool Metro when he decamped to Pensacola.   Which was undeniably graceless, stupefyingly tone-deaf for a guy whose walls display no skins.  That leave-taking makes us think we know what kind of guy he is, and he'll never broadcast himself out of that impression.

Here's T.C.'s problem:  I'll bet almost every Ticket JV has some T.C. in him:   burning to get more air time, resenting adverse listener and colleague criticism, thinking he's better than the other guys, and ambitious.  They all want to get ahead.  T.C.'s problem is that he's terrible at disguising it.   It's obvious to the listener.  It was apparent in the podcasts from Pensacola.   The guy says he has problems with authority, and his self-regard drips from the earbuds.  It's just a quality of his broadcast style, and he can't suppress it.   There are broadcasters who have made successful careers out of public attitudes not that different from T.C.'s.  It's just not what you want to hear from a tyro.

But it is legitimate to ask why he is favored over some of the other JV who don't cough into the mic and stumble memorably over copy.

If we're not prepared to take Cat at his word that of all his choices, T.C. was the most experienced, the logical choice, then I don't know the reason.  My guess is that it has something to do with the fact that hosts get a lot of authority over how their shows are run and probably have a great deal of influence over decisions Cat makes about program staff.  Of all the shows, Bob and Dan seem to require more care and feeding than any of the others, including Norm.  One seldom hears anything about anyone else's interns, but BaD's are the subject of frequent grumbling by other shows.  T.C. wended himself into their affections with his helpfulness long before he was a presence on the air.  Hey -- smart career move, no? Bob and Dan like and support him in the face of listener and colleague disdain.  And let's not forget the intimations that T.C. has some special skills, seeming to relate mostly to the his expertise in operating of electric computers, not a small thing. 

(Speaking of T.C.'s colleagues:  I'd love to know what goes on behind the scenes at The Little One.  I think T.C. may be as divisive there as he is to the P1.   Take Mike S's on-air scolding of T.C. for coughing into the mic:  Mike obviously feared no reprisals for smacking T.C. around pretty severely within the hearing of Cool Metro.  And I get a flavor that he is not a favorite of some of the other hosts.  What impression do you get when George says, attempting to deflect some T.C.-critical vote for the E-Brake:  "Hey, we love T.C."?)

Sometimes I wonder whether Bob and Dan get some, shall we say, special consideration.  They turned down bigger dollars at The Fan to stay with The Ticket.  They did Cumulus and the P1 a true solid by re-upping when they did.  It wouldn't shock me if Cat is sensibly showing some corporate gratitude by supporting their wishes to favor T.C. in Ticker and popping-on and other assignments.  I have no support for this.

And, as I've suggested above with the Corby/Cosell comparison, Cat may well view T.C. as the JV the listeners love to hate.  Cat doesn't care if listeners dislike him -- as long as they keep tuning in to hear his next drop.  Again, not to impugn the sincerity of my precious readers, is it imaginable that all the Confessors who claim they're being driven from BaD by T.C.'s presence aren't still tuning in?

That is not to say that BaD doesn't have its problems, just like we're proceeding from the assumption that The Old Grey Hardline ain't what she used to be.  And even Cat acknowledges that program content affects ratings.  But like Corby's creeping influence hasn't destroyed The Hardline or sent it to the depths of the Nielsen book, T.C.'s and Jake's participation in the middle of the day is, if a factor at all in what's going on with the ratings, a pretty tiny one.

And Cat gives every indication of having the same impression.

*     *     *

(4)  Summing Up.

We were appreciative of Cat taking time out to respond to questions.  His vigorous defense of The Ticket was expected.  A lot of us probably find ourselves either not believing him that he's not hearing any on-air problems that might affect ratings, or just disagreeing with him.

But I have to say that the entire flavor of his responses got me asking myself whether he's right and I'm wrong; whether it's The Ticket that's declined, or instead that after more than ten years of listening to programs that are pretty much unchanged in talent, tone, and content (Greg Williams's absence being an exception, although, after all was said and done, not as big an exception as we might have thought), I've just flat grown bored with it, and I'm nitpicking at the fringes -- and unfairly at that.

The AMA forced me at least to consider that what's grown stale to me may be sounding fresh and appealing to new listeners and younger listeners -- the Ticket's audience for the future and Cat's prey.

CORRECTION, probably the first of many:  Anon 316 notes that in the first edition of this post I misidentified T.C.'s Florida destination as Tallahassee.  I regret the error and thank Anon 316 for the correction.

AS PREDICTED, ANOTHER CORRECTION:  Anon 734 notes that  in the first edition of this post I misidentified Matt Mosley as "Mike."  I regret the error and thank Anon 734 for the correction. 

[Comments to this site are moderated. 

Before posting, please read Rules of the Confessional.  Thank you.] 

Quick Hits Before I Forget

Yes, I'll have some thoughts on the AMA, just leave me alone for Chrissakes.  I spent days on that thing, I'm taking a break from long-form think-pieces.  Here are some quick hits.

(1) I could not for the life of me figure out what George's "firearms legal" ads were about.  What is the product?  What service is being offered?  Apparently George uses this service ("like me"). 

I went to www.firearmslegal.com.  Apparently, this is a pitch for what are essentially prepaid legal services.  You pay a monthly fee and get your attorneys fees paid under the following circumstances, and I'm not kidding you, this is what it says:  "100% payment for attorney fees when a firearm is used lawfully for self-defense in protection of yourself, your family, or your property."


In other words, they will pay the fee only if they defend you successfully, and not if they fail (because your use of a firearm will have been found "unlawful").


Moreover, how often are homeowners prosecuted for shooting an invader?  Almost never.

Moreover, how often do homeowners shoot an invader?  Almost never.

In other words -- what a scam.  George should back away from this nonsense.

(2)  Let's put aside whether David Letterman is a pioneering comedy genius or a cranky, stammering bore.  My objection to the overcoverage of his departure on The Hardline relates not so much to the fact of the overcoverage itself, it's that it is almost free of interesting content.  Corby has absolutely no discernment when it comes to separating entertainment wheat from chaff.  The drumbeat of his worshipful descriptions of Dave (accompanied by his shameful browbeating of Mike for not tuning in at Corby's insistence, and Mike's meek acquiescence in these charges of his viewing shortcomings)  is dull when it occupies a segment, and excruciating when presented as a daily serial leading up to the last show.  It's just plain bad radio.

(3) Here's my extremely unsupported takeaway from Deflategate -- Tom's cheating on Giselle.

(4) Listening to the replay of the T.C./Sirois coughing incident on the E-Brake.  I'd love to know the T.C. behind-the-scenes stuff.  I need to go back and listen to Gordon's feral cat "TomCat Fleming" bit from a couple of days ago.  There's some inside stuff in there.  Anyone got an analysis of that bit?

[Comments to this site are moderated.  

Before posting, please read Rules of the Confessional.  Thank you.] 

ThePlainsman1310@gmail.com

@Plainsman1310 

Rules of the Confessional

Attend, O Confessors.

This is intended to be a site for people who like The Ticket.  Maybe they have an issue here and there, but, in general, I want Confessors to be fans, or, as they have come to be known, "The P1."

I want people to like coming here and know they're going to be treated with respect, or at least not put down by witless, content-free snark.

And, should a Ticket employee wander by, I want them to come away with the impression that they've been in the company of people who care about the station and think carefully about their reactions to it -- not a bunch of snippy teenagers.

So forgive me if I advise that I'm weary of refereeing pissy little flame wars between readers who can't express themselves without taking a shot at others. 

And weary as well of visitors who apparently don't like anything about The Ticket, this site, or Your Plainsman.

Or don't forgive me.  Don't care.

My past warnings have gone unheeded.  So, much as I hate to do it, I'm cracking down.

Accordingly:

1.   Shots.   No criticisms of the person of any prior commenter.  If you have a disagreement, express your view in a way that addresses the issue or the facts or the opinion.  However, even brief phrases:

   --   impugning intelligence or motives of a prior commenter;

   --   asserting that prior commenters are all the same guy;

   --   suggesting that a prior commenter lacks reading or comprehension skills;

   --   suggesting that a commenter hasn't listened to the station enough, or for long enough, or is otherwise not a good Ticket citizen;

   --   is generally nasty towards another,

will cause your confession to hit the pail instantly.  Criticism of opinions is OK, but do it by making your own supportable point or making a legitimate debater's criticism of the prior comment.

I don't care how good your confession is in other respects.  The most brilliant comment that contains a phrase like "here's a thought -- listen to the station" will get bounced.

Subjective?  Absolutely.  Here's a rule of thumb:  Read your post before you send it.  If you see a phrase which, if it were said about you would upset you and make you want to respond in kind -- take it out.

2.    Vulgarity.  Don't use it.

3.    Tone.  Angry, hateful, threatening, overly emotional comments -- out.  I'm serious about all of these comments, and this one may seem slight, but I'm telling you:  Tone it down.

4.    Name-Calling.  Applies not just to fellow Confessors, but to anyone.  

5.    Stuff That's Just Too Wrong.  The other day got a comment from a guy ragging on T.C. and Corby.  Same old stuff, didn't like it, but met the standards in effect at that time.  Was going to publish, then noticed that he seemed to think that the midday host's name was "Stern."

[5.5  (added 03-07-15):  Commentary on subjects' personal lives is strongly discouraged.  Exceptions may be made if the matter relates to on-air events.]

6.   Anything That Strikes Me As Designed to Pick a Fight.  You figure it out.

Here's a further suggestion:  Cut and paste your comment into a file before sending it.  If you don't see your comment within a few hours, I've probably made it go away.   If you still think it's worthwhile, go back and figure out why I bounced it.  Fix it and resubmit.

Guys, I'm sorry about this, but I'm even sorrier that the comments have gotten so sorry.  I'd say a good third to a fourth of the comments that I published on the last thread would not have made it under the foregoing standards. 

You will be amazed at how easy it is to express your point of view -- even one that is critical of the point of a prior comment -- without impugning the character or talents of your fellows on this site.

Don't write me complaining about my judgment on comments.  I'm not interested.  You want the objective standard of unfettered commentary, there are other homes for you on the plains of the Internet.

Let's clean this site up.

One more thing.

UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE, THIS SITE IS NOT ACCEPTING ANY COMMENTS, PRO OR CON, ABOUT T.C. FLEMING.  He's a part of The Ticket and fair game, but the volume of comments on him since his return to BaD Radio and weekend shows is grossly out of proportion to his significance to The Ticket.  Also, I'm mortally tired of them and no one has anything new to say.  I'll advise when this prohibition has been lifted.  I'm inclined to bounce all comments that even mention his name.

"Ragonk" is permitted.

This means you.

Come on now.  Let's keep this site going.  Let's make it a place that attracts the attention of people who matter and where you can be heard without bringing a bunch of cheap crap down on your head.

And let's have some fun.

Thank you for shopping at My Ticket Confession.

*     *     *

ThePlainsman1310@gmail.com

@Plainsman1310

This is Very Disturbing

Some topics for a holiday weekend:

(1)  Cover Story.  After five years, I hope I have earned the trust, respect, and affection of the Confessor.  Oh, there are those who loathe the site and me, and why they keep returning to disturb our merry discourse I will never know.  (See item 5, below.)  But in general, I sustain myself with the thought that on the Big Subjects, the Confessor and I would manage to find some common ground.

Bart's cars salute as he passes.

 But now, I'm not so sure.

I'm becoming intrigued with those Reagor-Dykes ads.

The ones that start with the high-production-value brassy fanfare and an actual radio voice-for-hire booming in sparkling hi-fidelity:  "REAGOR DYKES AUTO GROUP -- KEEPING IT REAL."  (May not have the wording entirely right -- next time I hear it I'll make a note and come back and correct.)  Followed, however, by the same phoned-in-from-Arcturus spiel from Bart himself, demonstrating the ways in which he keeps the car-buying experience real.

I confess (of course) that this calls my judgment on other matters into some question.

But I find myself kind of getting sucked in to the aw-shucks sincerity.  I find ol' Bart's persona likable.

And anyone who will spring for the high-quality intro but won't take the time or spend the money to get himself into a studio to cut a decent-sounding spot -- there's just something quirky about that that sort of draws me in to Bart's World.

Don't know that I'd buy a car from the guy.

But I'd let him give me a lecture about leasing.

(2)  Gushing.   More ad weirdness:  Those oil-well investment ads.

In the first place, what a terrible time to run an ad talking about ever-rising oil prices, at a time when the world is absolutely awash in petroleum and natural gas (hilariously contrary to the decades of predictions we've heard from the "limits to growth" crowd) and prices are plummeting and are likely to stay low for the foreseeable future.   Unless they're giving shares away, probably a poor time to invest.

In the second place, oil-well investment, like precious metals and other natural-resource investments, are home to some of the most virulent scams out there.  I don't expect The Ticket to investigate the claims of all of its advertisers, but if you are among the numerous very wealthy P1's thinking of making an investment (they usually require some minimum investment, typically but not always in the mid-five or low-six figures), please make your first call to the Texas State Securities Board to see if the investment is registered.  If it is not, find out from the investment company why it believes it is exempt from registration, and have them cite the statute or regulation upon which they are relying.  Don't invest without reviewing a complete prospectus.

In the third place, oil production revenue and taxation are hugely complex topics, and investors at your level do not take dollars off the top.   I'm not going to get into working v. carried interest, depletion, direct participation, and so forth.  If you have the dough to invest, spend an extra few grand and engage a reputable oil and gas lawyer to advise you.

Finally, don't do it.

(3)   T.C. Isn't Going Anywhere Anytime Soon.    Okay, okay, he may not be the favorite of The Confessor.   I get the criticism, but it really does seem overblown among the commentariat.  (I do not delete T.C. criticism unless it is scurrilous, overly personal, or violent.)

But someone out there likes him.

Or maybe his rates are attractive, because he's now doing advertised promotional appearances.  Sponsors have judged that he's a draw, that he'll bring people into their establishment to meet the increasingly famous Source Ragonk, and if sponsors think that, then Jeff C is probably prescient in having taken him back on.

Doesn't mean he's great -- just means he's appealing to certain sponsors.   And I'm guessing if you went to one of his appearances you'd see lots of folks shaking his hand, getting their pictures with him, collecting an autograph, and telling him to keep up the good work with The Ticket and IJB and ragonking the absolute bejeebers out of him.

And that, if nothing else, will keep him popping on.

(4)  Jake.  Sorry.  Still think the guy has got a lot and sounds good on The Ticket.

His sports talk is no worse, and, I think, better than that some of the hosts.  Wrong about everything?  Oh?  Well, if I'm recalling correctly, he was the only Ticket person who thought the Cowboys were going to be improved this year.

Yes, his voice has a Dylan-The-Argumentative-Teen lilt to it.  And I do count myself among those who wish to hear less socio-political-current-events commentary from him, but I wish the same thing about every other talker on The Ticket.   He's smart, he can be funny, he's knowledgeable.  Smarty-smug sometimes, sure.  But jeez, it's just not going to bring down the station like some seem to think.  If he proves to be a fixture on a daily show in the future, I can absolutely deal with that.

(5)  Moderation Report.   Every time I get to a screen I check the pending comments, so hope that hasn't slowed things down too much.  Certainly hasn't slowed the hits to the site, and I hope we can all agree that the conversation has returned to its historical lofty level. 

Just to be fair, let me report that some readers, or maybe only one or two, believe that I am an idiot and a bitch.  And some are unaccountably convinced that I have been doing this so I can be good chums with Ticket guys.  If so, then I am indeed an idiot, if not a bitch, because after close to 700 posts now, I have yet to meet or speak to a single Ticket employee or former employee.

Uh, Rudolph, I've got some bad news for you.

Some of the posts I get are actually amusing in their apparent lack of clarity on the concept of moderation:  profane, furious, violent, and one or two with factual assertions that are demonstrably false.  But all of them still seem to think that someone other than me is going to be reading them.  Their words live on the screen for about 1.7 seconds, most of those words probably unread by me, and they're gone.  What satisfaction there is in this effort on the other end, I have no idea.

*     *     *

Thanks for doing your Christmas shopping at My Ticket Confession, everybody, and have a Holly Jolly Ticket.

ThePlainsman1310@gmail.com

@Plainsman1310

Will Someone Capable Confessor Please Fix The Ticket's Wikipedia Page?

I was looking for a factoid I thought I remembered, being that The Ticket was the ratings leader in its demo almost from the first months of its operation.

I went to the KTCK Wikipedia page, and read this:

"The sometime controversial station has posted strong ratings in the Dallas radio market, especially its Arbitron top-rated shows^[1] The Hardline (who entertain the denizens of the metroplex) and Dunham and Miller, which have been the anchors of the station's success throughout its existence. And thanks to T.C. Fleming, created RAGONK!"

Let's put aside the baffling construction  of the sentences starting with The Hardline (so Dunham and Miller don't entertain "the denizens of the metroplex?), the wrong syntax ("the sometime controversial station"), and the inappropriate tone for Wikipedia.  The last sentence washes the entire entry in sophomoric jokiness, in addition to making no sense.  Who created RAGONK?  If not T.C. (who may have uttered it, but didn't create the phenomenon), then why are we thanking him? 

The whole passage is stupid.  More than stupid -- it's cheap.  RAGONK is a passing bit like hundreds of others -- although it may have legs -- and has no claim to this degree of prominence. I don't know much about the editing rules for Wikipedia.  Can anyone get in and strike this crap?  Please advise.

PS:  I don't blame T.C. for this -- doesn't look like his work, nor has he embraced the phenomenon.

BREAKING / EXCLUSIVE: The New World Catman Confesses

Well  .  .  .  it's not a Ticket Confession, exactly.

Jeff "Cat" Catlin ("The Catman of the Americas," as Mike R calls him), Ticket Program Director, flew by the site the other day.  He doesn't do that frequently, he says, but perhaps it's like binge watching a TV series.  He takes some time and browses the site a time or two a year.  And, if the spirit moves him, he might drop me a line with some impressions, corrections, and occasionally a nugget.

He did that a couple of days ago.  I asked him if I could post his thoughts, and he was kind enough to agree.  Bear in mind that this is not a planned essay of the exquisite construction you have come to expect at My Ticket Confession -- it's just an email that he has graciously allowed this site to reproduce.  It appears between the asterisks without editing.  So don't look for a distinctive beginning, middle, and end.

I'll have a brief note after his remarks.

*      *     *

First I think its nice and even charming and I LOVE p1s for having the attitude that The Ticket somehow operates outside the normal rules of a business. Wish it did, but it doesn’t.  We have to follow EEOC, Hippa Laws etc and all the rest. Long gone in radio and on the Ticket are the days where “one employee can get another employee blown out because they don’t like them”.  In radio wholesale format changes and blowouts went by the boards in 1996 when the telecommunications act was passed. But I digress.

Point being, employees are let go because of actual real performance issues. It has nothing to do with anything else. And certainly it’s not on a whim because, for example,  the Musers decide they didn’t like someone.

Side comment as it relates to Sean moving, TC on BaD,  etc. (See comment above about EEOC) the Hosts aren’t in management. They don’t hire or fire anyone. It sounds fun and all on the radio but its just not true. I hire these guys with corp approval. Now do I ask the shows for opinions? Of course I do. THEY Have to work in the studio with these guys every day. I don’t.  But the decisions I make, I make for the good of the station, the good of the show and how all the other pieces fit together and based on normal employee evals or interviews. Not everyone likes every decision and I can live with that. I don’t love every content segment every show does, but I respect the ability of the guys to make those choices, and I like to think they in turn show that same respect to me when I make a decision they disagree with, but still support.

And a word on the subjective "like vs dislike" —I get it, its radio, they are on air personalities….TC left here in the proper way. At least to me, he gave notice, he was trying to better himself in his career and all that…And he got blown out in Pensacola and I did what I thought any human being would do. He called me, and I extended a hand—I didn’t give him his old job back, I didn’t offer charity. I told him what I had available and how it would work and then he had to decide himself if wanted to start from the bottom now he’s here.  He did. I give anyone credit for that.  I also recognize that he HAS gotten better,  because he has.  And all of us in life have had situations that have helped us grow and change. Kudos to those that actually do. He got the ticker job because he was most ready for it right now and his tickers were consistently the best of the group that applied. (PS-some of the other guys that applied will be heard on weekends PT)

Sean moved to AM Drive because (see above again) It was best for the station, best for the show and best for all the other pieces. And he’s still planning on doing Dtalk next season.  He was happy and excited to do it..and no I didn’t really give him a choice. But he saw the writing on the wall when I asked him to start getting his head right with it. But he knew it was the best move as well. Everyone up here, to a man, is a team player. When it comes down to it, everyone wants to do whats best for The Ticket first.

Justin IS good at tickers and he’s growing. He is on the proper career path here and he will get more opportunities to grow. But at this time for this spot, TC was the choice.  (BTW BaD Radio nor Jake hard sold me on adding or not adding TC to the show. In fact they told me when I asked, that they were cool with any move I ended up making including keeping Sean 10a-3pm) J.

Newbury’s role at the station I think has actually increased with his presence on Cowboys Countdown to Kickoff.Jake is doing a fine job as BaD Radio Producer….and all of the guys, All of us,  LIKE Tom. For real. He still works here.

The Shake Joint has the highest ratings of any weekend show on the ticket and that is pretty consistently true and its usually a pretty significant margin.

*      *     *

I would ask that Confessors bear in mind that Cat's doing us a nice turn here and that criticism or disagreement be expressed in your inside voice and like your mother is at your elbow.

He mentioned that he likes the illustrations.

Thanks, Cat

My thanks to the Western Hemispherical Catman.

ThePlainsman1310@gmail.com

@Plainsman1310