Save me from Colin Cowherd!

You described Cowherd perfectly.

 

Though I did used to listen to him when I had ESPN on XM radio. He does do some good radio, even if he is insufferable a lot of times. At least he's entertaining, though to me that's mostly because of his "hot takes."

 

My favorite Cowherd gimmick is how he will present a ridiculous point of view and act like the general public or a large faction of the public is making this argument. Then he acts like he is some kind of genius because he won a debate with nobody.

 

I love when SVP & Russillo (though now just Russillo) will take some playful jabs at Cowherd, often ribbing the tired cliches Cowherd trots out. In their best Cowherd impersonation, "rust-belt," "culture," and so on.

 

Now, THAT was pretty good radio. Can't believe they broke up those guys but still keep pushing Mike&Mike and Cowherd.

 

Absolutely cannot stand Mike & Mike. Never listen to them. However, I did enjoy SVP and Rusillo. They were very good together.

 

Precisely. Mike & Mike are clowns. What the WWL sees in them I have no idea, but I guess the lowest common denominator enjoys it.

 

Breaking up SVP & Russillo is very tough. But I think it's a good move for those guys. SVP gets his own late-night show, which I'm interested to see what type of format it follows, and becomes an even bigger figure at ESPN.

Given SVP being perhaps the most visible media-type now working at ESPN, I'm so glad to see him throwing his 100 percent support behind Russillo, in saying it should remain "The Russillo Show" when contracts are up in the summer and everything.

Russillo has been very good on his own (or, with Danny Kanell). He's the best basketball mind on radio or television; he's like a poor-man's Bill Simmons, who is just as, if not more, talented as Simmons.

 

Cowherd is my only "must listen" in the entire ESPN radio stable, which I know makes me the minority here. I do like Jorge Sadano (sp?) and Adnan Vark a lot. LeBatard/Stugotz has grown on me a lot since I went pretty much 'podcast-only'.

What I like about Cowherd is that his life echoed mine, albeit he has made a ton more money. Did local TV for years - love those stories - but I also like his segments about business and tying them back into sports. I think it's an ideal fit as, from 10 to 1, what's his core audience? Guys working in small businesses, driving between sales calls or schmoes like me at home before going into the station. I understand that Cowherd will soon be joined by a female sportscaster from Chicago, Jen Lada. Curious what's behind this move...

SVP/Rusillo was... okay. I was bored to tears when they would interview athletes, especially college football players. Rusillo is strong on the NBA but I can't see him carrying a three-hour show. He's an ideal "second voice" for a two-person show. SVP brought more strong opinions than Mike Tirico, well, okay, a dead man can bring more strong opinions than Tirico, but SVP didn't have much interesting to say. My favorite part about SVP was when he would change his accent/dialect when talking with someone who happened to be African-American. Painful and amusing all in one.

Mike & Mike is truly awful. Every person that I've met who likes them is usually a bit older and loves the "radio gags" of yesteryear. They are the Subway sandwich of national sports talk radio. Bland, overhyped and very expensive. Not sure if this is true, but I've heard that ESPN is strong-arming all of the affiliates that they MUST take M&M to have the affiliation. The other shows can come or down but that must all have clearance for Mike and Mike.

LeBatard's Show, during the NBA playoffs, was pretty damn good. His father's voice is a hilarious side gimmick and the banter with him and Stugotz is usually pretty good, unless it delves into talking about farts or models.

Freddie Coleman. I love listening to the English language often defeat him about every fifth sentence.

For the non-ESPN types (or former ESPN anchors), Rich Eisen and Dan Patrick are hyped beyond belief but neither, IMO, really carries a show and makes you think. They react instead of initiate (which I think Cowherd does at a high level). Both Eisen and Patrick strike me as guys who love the celebrity of the platform but they don't necessarily put in the prep work.

 

Glad to see someone on here besides me can appreciate Cowherd. He's good. I don't understand the hate. I just find that he makes good points and I often agree with him.

 

Doc and ex, enjoy him.

Add me to the rest of the chorus on here that can't stand him. I rarely listen (don't think I have in a full year), but I hear about his remarks sometimes being a sports writer and all. From his dumb "he's not a star" comment about Joey Votto to his constant "criticism" of Andy Dalton, he has few fans in my area. It'd be something if his "hot takes" had some objective reasoning to it, instead of "Votto just doesn't seem like a star," and "Andy Dalton's a hack." Hot takes! (And no, I'm not a Cincinnati fanboi, so his comments are not getting under my skin in that aspect.)

Even though I'm younger, I guess I have too much old school journalism blood in me. I can't stand radio hosts who are mainly concerned with being personalities and drawing up scripted feuds and "against the grain" stances in order to be edgy, facts be damned.

The only national guy I like to listen to often (a couple of times a month) is Patrick. Ex, I don't need a radio host to "initiate" a conversation. I like Patrick because he's calm, doesn't get worked up over this stuff, and his arguments are usually backed by objective reasoning. There's no hot air. I don't remember who else said it on here when I read through this topic the other day, but the poster who said something to the effect that Patrick seems to understand the absurdity of having a three-hour show dedicated to games is right on.

 

I want to see Pacino play Mad Dog. Maybe DeNiro?