Excellent 2017 07 05 Shake Joint AND Mike R v "Not a Podcast"

(1)   I never went to church camp but today's segment on it was one of the most entertaining things I've heard on The Ticket for a long time.

(2)  Not attributable to Shake Joint, but:  Charlie Gray is asking listeners to let him know if Hidden Cost Motors and Heavy Metal Motors should be permanently retired.  Think his email might have given him a clue?

(3) Can't believe Sean will be interviewing one of my favorite crime writers, Don Winslow, here in just a little while.

(4)  Thanks to Jake for asking Sean to explain what "pitch framing" is from a stats point of view.  I kept hearing it mentioned on The Ticket, but had no idea what it meant.

===========

This Machine/Mike R issue is intriguing.  It only came up yesterday, so here's the string from the commentary for your reading pleasure, and a late unrelated comment from a reader.  I doubt we'll see much more about this on Twitter, but I think it's a large-pulling back of the curtain.

Shaggy said...

Rhynes-Machine controversy brewing on twitter...

July 4, 2017 at 12:27 PM

Anonymous said...

Can you give a little detail, Shags, por favor? I'm not on the Twitters.

July 4, 2017 at 1:23 PM

Gopher said...

Shaggy: I'm not seeing anything on either feed. ?

July 4, 2017 at 5:03 PM

The Plainsman said...

I haven't taken the time to learn the structure and practices of Twitter, so it's hard to tell exactly who is saying what to whom. However 16h ago (as of July 4 at 5:27p), Father John Zesty tweeted: "When the people you look up to shit on you on the internet." Attached to that tweet was a shot of what appeared to be another tweet of someone who was "Replying to @FYFMethod, k@BracketDan, and 6 others," with the following text: "Hopefully his tastes are discerning enough to turn off 3-7 today."

Circumstantially, it looks like whoever was the original author of that tweet -- and I can't find it anywhere, including @OldGreyWolf -- was taking a shot at Monte + The Machine filling in for The Hardline.

That's all I know. If anyone else can excavate what's going on here, let me know. If that was Mike R shooing people away from The Hardline's fill-in show, that would be news.

July 4, 2017 at 5:31 PM

Shaggy said...

Nope, the original tweet was a P1 wife "complaining" (but not really) about her husband listening to the ticket on his phone on vacation in Florida. Completely innocuous/complimentary of the ticket in general. Not related to Not a Podcast in the least. Mike's shot seemed to come out of nowhere

https://twitter.com/fyfmethod/status/881984097274527744

July 4, 2017 at 5:52 PM

Shaggy said...

(It was Rhynes that said "Hopefully his tastes are discerning enough to turn off 3-7 today")

July 4, 2017 at 5:55 PM

The Plainsman said...

Thank you, Shaggy.

Mike's shot doesn't feel like a bit; nothing about it suggests he's teasing.

That's extraordinary. Mike R apparently displeased at the prospect of Monte + The Machine's stewardship of his time slot.

We wrote last week speculating -- well, mostly speculating, but also crediting some rumbles -- that perhaps The Musers aren't the warmest home for certain factions of the JV.

Now we have Mike R going radio silent (NPI) on David Mino and suggesting, quite gratuitously according to Shaggy, that people shouldn't listen to his distant-tier JV drydock replacement.

This site likes to pump up the JV when it has the slightest excuse to do so, but in this connection I must report that on a startling number of occasions when I've been tuned in Machine has presumed to dish it out to some weekday hosts and other of his Ticket way-betters. I hope he's as prepared to take it.

July 4, 2017 at 8:07 PM

Anonymous said...

A few questions to anyone and I will hang up and listen.

1) Is "not a podcast" a reference to IJB? I know a lot of the JV'rs are annoyed with the way one of that group left and made it back as if it never happened.

2) Who is running the ESPN station? I know cumulus owns their signal, but how does that work? JJT was fired at ESPN but still runs a radio show. The reason I ask is it is stated it is less expensive to run national instead of local each night. Yet several nights their is local programming with Elf and others on ESPN.

3) If host are stretched for content during the summer, why not a soccer segment? plenty of MLS and Gold Cup or other tournament action. I guess we could have another will the Cowboys win 12 or 11 games this summer. There are plenty of things going on besides the Rangers or whatever they pull off ESPN headlines and just repeat the article. Several shows last week seemed like they were just stretching to get to that next break. Certain host def need a strong second host with them.

July 5, 2017 at 8:36 AM

Mike R or Mike M?  Do I have to choose?  They're both so  .  .  .  radio-handsome.

OPEN THREAD: Various

Let's face it, every thread here is an open thread.  I'll be away for a few days.  In the manner of Lee "Hacksaw" Hamilton, here are some topics on the table to get you started:

(1) Sunday AM.  Following up on the last comment thread, what would you like to see on Sunday morning, or elsewhere on the weekends?

(2) Bass to MaSS?  I have been startled by a couple of anti-Sean Bass confessions in the comments to the previous post, complaining of know-it-all-ism and breathing patterns.  I have to disagree.  When I tune in and hear a Sean-based program, whether with Ty or Newbury, I'm in.  Always like those shows.  Would have no problem with a Sunday morning show featuring him, Ty, or David.  (Or other guys, either, but they seem to team up with more regularity.)

(3) Matt M.  Also started by the vitriol directed at the departing Matt McClearin.  Yes, Matt has "boundary" issues, although I would classify them more as "governor" or "editor" issues, and I understand the sentiment that one makes one own bed in radio, as one does in whatever freely-chosen profession in which one is engaged (not to mention the personal choices that require, um, cash money).  But they by no means dominate his performance, and on balance I think it's undeniable that Scot and Matt have earned the shot they're getting and that Matt is an equal partner in their success.  I didn't take down random P1's post, because, bitter though it seemed (and the "whore"comment did almost get it booted), it at least had some thinking behind it.

(4) Ax.  And I am hoping, really really hoping, that übercritical posts like those relating to Sean and Matt, are not folks with, shall we say, an ax to grind about these guys.  If you know what I mean.  I am extremely reluctant to question the motives of people who take the time to write comments, but when those comments tend toward the angry and personal (and oddly detailed), I am moved at least to wonder.  If I thought this site were being used to advance anyone's personal agenda to the detriment of both this site and The Ticket, it would be vamanos in zero time.  Maybe I need to get the machete out more often. 

There's a topic:  I don't moderate comments (do not have the time and want comments to reflect breaking items), but should I be more aggressive about weeding out posts that have a legitimate take but are gratuitously mean or nasty?

(5) IJB.  I really regret I do not have time to listen to podcasts.  I barely have time to knock this thing out.  But a lot of P1's really like what Jake and T.C. are slinging, and I wouldn't be offended if the CTO gave them at least a tryout on Sunday mornings.

(6) New Orleans.  What did we all think about Super Bowl Week in New Orleans? Here:  mixed.

Outta time.  Keep it cool, Confessors, with my thanks.

 

Twitter:  @Plainsman1310

Email:  ThePlainsman1310@gmail.com





Musers Quick Hit

+     +     +

From this morning's Muser showgram:

GORDON:  I was on "It's Just Banter" recently  .  .  .

JEREMY [under his breath but clearly audible]:  Why?

FERNANDO:  [Explosive cackle.]

SOMEBODY:  Be nice, Jer.

Ah, Ticket politics.  We try to read the clues on who are pals and who are not, who's just teasing and who's not.  

It's been awhile since any Confessor has mentioned IJB.  I got the impression that most readers liked the podcasts.  Those gents still turning out quality stuff?

*     *     *

Follow Your Plainsman on Twitter:  @Plainsman1310

Email Your Plainsman:  ThePlainsman1310@gmail.com

Little Weak Jeremy and Anonymous – It’s Just Confession! (PART 3)

After Little Weak Jeremy’s initial comment and Anonymous’s point-by-point response, each offered one more comment apiece.

Little Weak Jeremy Continued:

Maybe I'm beating my head against a wall, but I would suggest you listen to an episode or two of IJB before judging Jake Z based on "space is super gay". He's spoken at length about how that type of opinion doesn't represent his general attitude toward intellectual topics, etc. (the latest IJB actually deals with Jake having received his Master's degree). Sure, the "super gay" is Jake's most famous drop and the one that will be a thorn in his side forever and ever, but don't judge the man's contributions solely on that unfortunate moment (no, I don't agree with that particular opinion of his either).

As far as the bigger Ticket picture goes, if you and I are looking at the same set of info, and you come to the conclusion that this thing is headed for the shitter, and I don't, then I'm not sure what else I can do to argue the point further. We look into the crystal ball and simply see different fortunes. I suppose we've reached an endpoint in that discussion.

Finally, Anonymous Took the Last Word – Actually, a Fairish Number of Them:

First off, my comments are not personally aimed toward IJB/Jake Z. I believe this is rather clear. I only used IJB to illustrate my point regarding what I perceive to be a niche audience and its relation to The Ticket's future.

As to Jake Z's education and intellectual interests: I'm not sure what that has to do with the program content that he has chosen to put forth. If he's into, oh, I don't know, biochemistry, great. But why would he talk about it on a podcast such as he and TC have constructed? It wouldn't make sense. Thus one's interests outside of a genre might make interesting talk once in a blue moon for a change of pace, but in general they don't work. So, I'm a bit puzzled about your statement. Furthermore, if Jake Z has spoken at length about the things that truly interest him, then perhaps he ought to change the direction of the show to reflect said interests (?).

I have listened to several of the IJB podcasts. I enjoyed the Rhyner interview (perhaps because they were on their best behavior/Rhyner is interesting to me). I used the "space is gay" quip because most readers of the blog, I imagine, would know what I'm talking about. I judge the man's contribution to The Ticket by his work on The Ticket. Especially his one chance at actually hosting his own show.  [PLAINSMAN:  Is this a reference to the late-night IJB experiment?]  It was a trainwreck. Both the callers and the hosts demolished the thing. There's a reason why they weren't asked to do it again. I can see that you enjoy the content and presentation that IJB puts forward, and that's great. However, they are minor figures at the station. I will be stunned if Jake Z or TC are ever offered jobs as hosts. Hell, I'll be stunned if they're still at the station in any capacity three years from now. IJB is a podcast that is not a part of the station; and it never will be.

I agree with your second overarching point (agreeing to disagree). Though I would like to reiterate from my previous comments that I've never claimed that The Ticket is going down the shitter. My claim is that if the new hosts/programs that management is hiring/airing are any indication as to where this is going, then the special nature of The Ticket will die away with each loss of the mainstays; it will submerge into the homogeneity of sports/guy talk radio. And that will be a crying shame. I hope that's not going to be the case.

Finally, I'd like to address the age-difference issue:

I remember in my 20s listening to the Rant (even before it was the Rant, when it was on late night Saturdays) and thinking "how can anyone not find this hysterical, smart, and even at times genius?" Some of it actually was. But most of it wasn't. I used to record the shows on a very early version of an MP3 recorder (thank God for the CCrane radio company). Three years ago, when I was 35, I went back and listened to a very large sample size of the Rant shows. Like I said, most of it wasn't very good. In fact, it was tough to find the gems (they were there, though). I, along with my buddies, used to scratch our heads as to why the Rant wasn't on everyday. After going back and listening, I now see why. I see why it was on once per weekend. It was on the whole devoid of content; it was on the whole one big inside joke with its own highly privatized language; a language and a joke that only appealed to a niche audience.

While this niche audience calls in to screenless segments, tweets and e-mails, etc., and is very much into the aspects of the station which they find interesting (i.e., comedic value), it moves on when it outgrows or finds new avenues of entertainment to fill what the station once satisfied. I remained a listener because I am a sports talk radio fan. Most of my buddies eventually began to stop listening altogether. The thing is, The Ticket is Sports Radio 1310, The Ticket; it is a sports station first and foremost; sports talk will always be its engine. While the guy talk/comedic value is what keeps the engine running smoothly, it is not the engine. I think we agree that it's that perfect mix of sports/guy-comedy talk that makes The Ticket great. But the day the station leans too far one way, its greatness will quickly fade. If I would have had my way, way back when, I'd have had it all Rant all the time. And The Ticket would have faltered. I'm not saying that you want it as such, I'm just saying that the greater niche audience that I believe you're a part of does . . . and if management allows for it to happen, different days are ahead.

Anyway, once again I've rambled on far too long.

It's been a great back and forth, LWJ.

*     *     *

Indeed it has.  Since I’m interested in these same things, I don’t think either Little Weak Jeremy or Anonymous rambled on too long – sometimes it takes saying the same thing in different ways to get the overall points across.  I think both succeeded, behaved like gentlemen (I am guessing), and they have my gratitude.

I’ll have a postscript up on this in a few days.

In the meantime, thanks to The Nation for great comments on these thoughts to date.

*     *     *

Follow Your Plainsman on Twitter:  @Plainsman1310