Have the Buffalo Sports media ever been worse?

[indigoo]

Are you saying that someone here wouldn't be able to do better prep than Schopp does? He very clearly doesn't do any prep for his interviews. It's one thing not to already know things about players, even though it should be his job to, like, follow some hockey. He could at least read a Wikipedia entry or something.

I'm saying we don't know what prep he does. And the point of his show isn't really to be technical with the details. It's talk radio. Sports talk radio. I listen to WGR daily at work, and context is important. Meaning, you can miss a lot on how the show evolves daily if you don't hear it. The problem with radio now is the information is out there before they can even comment on it in a relevant way. Information is so abundant that many times listeners can be more informed than the hosts. Different world.

I have no doubt that anyone here could do a better job at producing and hosting a show that talks hockey, prospects, the draft, etc. But again, WGR shows are just about opinions and ****. If people hate the programming they can avoid it.

What's bad about WGR is having ****** journalism on board like Paul Hamilton. The guy is a joke.

 

[Slapshot85]

Or hit stop before the comments module loads and the warning never appears.

Or use a Javascript blocker.

Or any of the innumerable methods to get around site paywall technology from 2001.

Yep!

 

[Paxon]

I'm saying we don't know what prep he does. And the point of his show isn't really to be technical with the details. It's talk radio. Sports talk radio. I listen to WGR daily at work, and context is important. Meaning, you can miss a lot on how the show evolves daily if you don't hear it. The problem with radio now is the information is out there before they can even comment on it in a relevant way. Information is so abundant that many times listeners can be more informed than the hosts. Different world.

I have no doubt that anyone here could do a better job at producing and hosting a show that talks hockey, prospects, the draft, etc. But again, WGR shows are just about opinions and ****. If people hate the programming they can avoid it.

What's bad about WGR is having ****** journalism on board like Paul Hamilton. The guy is a joke.

I'm saying we do know the prep work he does (very little). That's apparent in his interviews. I don't wanna argue about whether or not he should, because I don't really care, but it's pretty clear that he doesn't. Talk radio is universally terrible in my opinion and he's not particularly good even by those standards. The call-in audience should take as much of the blame as he does.

 

[indigoo]

I'm saying we do know the prep work he does (very little). That's apparent in his interviews. I don't wanna argue about whether or not he should, because I don't really care, but it's pretty clear that he doesn't. Talk radio is universally terrible in my opinion and he's not particularly good even by those standards. The call-in audience should take as much of the blame as he does.

Can't argue there. The interviews are mainly filler it seems. Random and the sort. Good point about the call-in audience, WGR has some of the worst.

 

[Paxon]

Can't argue there. The interviews are mainly filler it seems. Random and the sort. Good point about the call-in audience, WGR has some of the worst.

You know who is good at interviews? Peters. He has the benefit of riding shotgun to Sylvester in interviews, but as a former player he knows how to relate to the guys, he clearly watches a lot of hockey at all levels (and understands the game well), and he's a funny conversationalist, which puts the subject at ease.

 

[Sabre Dance]

13 years of no playoffs for the Bills, going on 16 years of the same stuff from Darcy, a year or 2 of success followed by 2-3 years of stupid decisions or bad hockey.

Sorry guys, but the sports teams are the issue, not the media. Could you imagine covering this crap for so long? You have to do something to make it interesting.

 

[EichHart]

13 years of no playoffs for the Bills, going on 16 years of the same stuff from Darcy, a year or 2 of success followed by 2-3 years of stupid decisions or bad hockey.

Sorry guys, but the sports teams are the issue, not the media. Could you imagine covering this crap for so long? You have to do something to make it interesting.

It's the lack of knowledge of anything Bills and Sabres related that annoys the hell out of me. As I already stated nearly every Buffalo Sabres HF poster knows more about the NHL draft than does anyone employed at WGR. They don't put forth the effort to learn anything either even though they are getting paid to do just that. I get the whole entertaining thing. But this is Buffalo...We are obsessed with our teams and want a more detailed understanding into the Draft, our prospects and there development, future trade/FA signings,etc...You can't get that from the so called "sports experts"...You get that here on HF boards.

 

[Sabre Dance]

It's the lack of knowledge of anything Bills and Sabres related that annoys the hell out of me. As I already stated nearly every Buffalo Sabres HF poster knows more about the NHL draft than does anyone employed at WGR. They don't put forth the effort to learn anything either even though they are getting paid to do just that. I get the whole entertaining thing. But this is Buffalo...We are obsessed with our teams and want a more detailed understanding into the Draft, our prospects and there development, future trade/FA signings,etc...You can't get that from the so called "sports experts"...You get that here on HF boards.

The 1st problem is thinking local radio hosts are supposed to be experts. They are basically just guys that are good at talking for 2-4 hours straight without really saying anything.

I like WGR for local sports interviews only, like players, front office, and coaches. Other than that who cares what they say. Its just time filling. Half the time they probably dont even believe what they are saying.

 

[EichHart]

The 1st problem is thinking local radio hosts are supposed to be experts. They are basically just guys that are good at talking for 2-4 hours straight without really saying anything.

I like WGR for local sports interviews only, like players, front office, and coaches. Other than that who cares what they say. Its just time filling. Half the time they probably dont even believe what they are saying.

So your saying that a local sports radio station is not supposed to be more informed than the average everyday Joe on our NHL and NFL teams/prospects/etc...? So what your saying is I should not expect this? Are you being serious? This is there job...They get paid well to do this. For example, I should not expect an IT professional to be well versed in computers, programming, software, hardware, etc....? Should I not expect this from someone who does this as there profession. You aren't using logic at all.

 

[dotcommunism]

13 years of no playoffs for the Bills, going on 16 years of the same stuff from Darcy, a year or 2 of success followed by 2-3 years of stupid decisions or bad hockey.

Sorry guys, but the sports teams are the issue, not the media. Could you imagine covering this crap for so long? You have to do something to make it interesting.

Why should the quality of the teams have anything at all to do with the quality of the media? This doesn't actually follow at all, and seems to just be you pushing your own agenda about blaming Sabres' management for everything, even the media being garbage.

 

[Jacob582]

You know who is good at interviews? Peters. He has the benefit of riding shotgun to Sylvester in interviews, but as a former player he knows how to relate to the guys, he clearly watches a lot of hockey at all levels (and understands the game well), and he's a funny conversationalist, which puts the subject at ease.

Peters can be okay interviewing players, but I generally think he is an awful interviewer.

At times he talks too much and has the need to have his point heard rather than interview for the benefit of hearing the person's point of view.

 

[SackTastic]

13 years of no playoffs for the Bills, going on 16 years of the same stuff from Darcy, a year or 2 of success followed by 2-3 years of stupid decisions or bad hockey.

Sorry guys, but the sports teams are the issue, not the media. Could you imagine covering this crap for so long? You have to do something to make it interesting.

You can be critical of underperforming teams without resorting to idiocy.

 

[indigoo]

It's the lack of knowledge of anything Bills and Sabres related that annoys the hell out of me. As I already stated nearly every Buffalo Sabres HF poster knows more about the NHL draft than does anyone employed at WGR. They don't put forth the effort to learn anything either even though they are getting paid to do just that. I get the whole entertaining thing. But this is Buffalo...We are obsessed with our teams and want a more detailed understanding into the Draft, our prospects and there development, future trade/FA signings,etc...You can't get that from the so called "sports experts"...You get that here on HF boards.

Again, though, that's not their job as radio hosts (as mentioned.) The average fan does not really care about those things. That's why sites like HF exist, to cater to the people that really care. And I don't know if you know this, but Schopp has been very into analytics, like Matthew Coller, for a while. The show is there to get the gut reaction and hash it out, not go over the nuances of the draft and prospects. We don't know what they research outside of the show, so I don't think it's fair to say they do nothing. All I'm saying is a) if you don't like the show, don't listen and b) the show is there for a different audience from what most of us on HF want. As all talk radio is.

As Art Bell said, and as I've noticed recently with the afternoon guys going solo a lot; co-hosts in radio tend to gang up on callers. Art hated that. It's so true though. This may be another reason people can't stand them, and I get that. I will agree about Peters, he actually seemed pretty good when I heard him on Draft coverage. He must be getting some solid experience on the TWCSports Network. I really can't stand Sylvester though. He is difficult to handle, but wasn't TOO bad on Draft day. I really don't have a problem with any of the on-air staff at WGR. Some TBN "journalists" and Paul Hamilton, though, that's where it goes downhill for me.

 

[RazielMoshman]

That's why the blog-o-sphere gets some much more traction. Less axes being ground, more insight in some cases (KB as a great example)...

Hoppe and Vogl actually cover the team, wish they got more play than the columnists. As for GR...

Thats why I stopped reading all the news articles and mostly use Twitter, Sabresnoise/Hockey News/NHL.com/TSN and here. The main trustworthy sources of information. Being in the UK I'm all to familiar with **** journalism.

 

[MayDay]

13 years of no playoffs for the Bills, going on 16 years of the same stuff from Darcy, a year or 2 of success followed by 2-3 years of stupid decisions or bad hockey.

Sorry guys, but the sports teams are the issue, not the media. Could you imagine covering this crap for so long? You have to do something to make it interesting.

I think it's a little of Column A and a little of Column B.

Yes, a lot of the Buffalo sports media does seem overly and needlessly critical, often seeming juvenile and petty, with axes to grind.

On the other hand, the Bills and Sabres have brought this on themselves by making themselves easy targets for criticism. A decade+ of poor management, mediocre (or worse) teams, lack of results, etc.

I feel like the teams can't really complain about poor treatment in the media given how poorly they've generally performed in recent years.

 

[Chainshot]

Again, though, that's not their job as radio hosts (as mentioned.) The average fan does not really care about those things. That's why sites like HF exist, to cater to the people that really care. And I don't know if you know this, but Schopp has been very into analytics, like Matthew Coller, for a while. The show is there to get the gut reaction and hash it out, not go over the nuances of the draft and prospects. We don't know what they research outside of the show, so I don't think it's fair to say they do nothing. All I'm saying is a) if you don't like the show, don't listen and b) the show is there for a different audience from what most of us on HF want. As all talk radio is.

As Art Bell said, and as I've noticed recently with the afternoon guys going solo a lot; co-hosts in radio tend to gang up on callers. Art hated that. It's so true though. This may be another reason people can't stand them, and I get that. I will agree about Peters, he actually seemed pretty good when I heard him on Draft coverage. He must be getting some solid experience on the TWCSports Network. I really can't stand Sylvester though. He is difficult to handle, but wasn't TOO bad on Draft day. I really don't have a problem with any of the on-air staff at WGR. Some TBN "journalists" and Paul Hamilton, though, that's where it goes downhill for me.

Speciality aside, I don't usually listen, even to the interviews, because when I do he does not seem to do the basic preparation that guys on the other available sports AM radio station do -- the FAN 590 out of Toronto. THAT is my biggest beef with the guy and to an extent the morning show as well. At least prepare and act professionally.

 

[smitter88]

Did anyone else catch Schopp saying "Zulser" numerous times yesterday? Did I miss the lead in, and it was all a big joke? Because otherwise, there is no defending a guy for not knowing the name of a player who has been here for a year and a half.

It also bugs me how proud they seem about their lack of knowledge of college sports. NCAA Football is probably the second biggest sport in the country, and they think it's some big joke. But yes, we'd all much rather hear about how many concerts you're going to this summer.

 

[Sabre Dance]

Why should the quality of the teams have anything at all to do with the quality of the media? This doesn't actually follow at all, and seems to just be you pushing your own agenda about blaming Sabres' management for everything, even the media being garbage.

What I see is people upset with opinions of people paid to give opinions. You have one GM in Buffalo for going on 16 years. Not a lot of success.

I really dont know what you expect. How can someone be fair and unbiased when the person you are talking about has had such little success over such a long period. Is the media supposed to think he will change after 15 years?

I dont understand why some of the Sabres fanbase defends this organization. They are a bottom organization. Fans even defended them in 2007 when there should have been uproar and empty seats. Same goes for the Bills, even more so.

 

[Chainshot]

What I see is people upset with opinions of people paid to give opinions. You have one GM in Buffalo for going on 16 years. Not a lot of success.

I really dont know what you expect. How can someone be fair and unbiased when the person you are talking about has had such little success over such a long period. Is the media supposed to think he will change after 15 years?

I see people who have issues with the preparation and professionalism of a large cross-section of the press. This isn't about anyone putting a shine on anyone's ass, this is about them coming off as ignorant of the sports they are supposedly covering.

 

[Sabre Dance]

I see people who have issues with the preparation and professionalism of a large cross-section of the press. This isn't about anyone putting a shine on anyone's ass, this is about them coming off as ignorant of the sports they are supposedly covering.

I think the Sabres come off as an organization that thinks they are better than what they are, IMO arrogant. Combine that with frustration of losing and I think thats how we get where we are with buffalo media.

Now we have the owner saying multiple times, "what has Darcy done wrong". I mean come on. They really need to wake up.

 

[Clock]

I think the Sabres come off as an organization that thinks they are better than what they are, IMO arrogant. Combine that with frustration of losing and I think thats how we get where we are with buffalo media.

The whole idea of "professionalism" is that you don't get emotional about the topic at hand and therefore allow your opinions about every single thing regarding said topic be colored by said emotions. Saying that our media is influenced by frustration and the team's apparent arrogance indicates a lack of professionalism.

How's the organization arrogant, by the way? Who are the Sabres acting superior to?

 

[SackTastic]

I think the Sabres come off as an organization that thinks they are better than what they are, IMO arrogant. Combine that with frustration of losing and I think thats how we get where we are with buffalo media.

Now we have the owner saying multiple times, "what has Darcy done wrong". I mean come on. They really need to wake up.

You can ask really tough, hard questions of an organization, and not make yourself look like a petulant child. Jim Kelley did that his entire career.

To be honest, as much as I like Terry Pegula, we can all agree he's not the most polished individual when it comes to public speaking and interviews. Kelley would have had a field day with the man.

A good, competent journalist would hear "What has Darcy done wrong?" and been able to counter with specific moves/non-moves/decisions that set the franchise back, or were generally perceived as 'bad'. Maybe Pegula would have had a good answer, maybe he wouldn't. We won't know because our reporters don't do things like that. They simply take the comment and complain in a blog post or on Twitter about it.

The role of a reporter is to gather facts and ask questions to gather information. That information should be presented to the public who can then make their own decisions and interpretations. If the Sabres refuse to hold press conferences, or answer questions when asked, then reporters should REPORT THAT, and the public can decide how they feel about it. Our reporters try to tell us what we SHOULD think about certain actions. I, for one, ain't got no time for that.

 

[Sabre Dance]

The whole idea of "professionalism" is that you don't get emotional about the topic at hand and therefore allow your opinions about every single thing regarding said topic be colored by said emotions. Saying that our media is influenced by frustration and the team's apparent arrogance indicates a lack of professionalism.

How's the organization arrogant, by the way? Who are the Sabres acting superior to?

Well we can start with the Pegula stance that Darcy hasn't done anything wrong. I wont even go into the QUinn era, dont have to.

There are people here that actually criticize the media more than the losing team the media covers. I think that feeds my frustration even more. I find it unbelievable that people get upset over negative things are said about the Sabres when they lose as much as they do.

 

[SackTastic]

Well we can start with the Pegula stance that Darcy hasn't done anything wrong. I wont even go into the QUinn era, dont have to.

There are people here that actually criticize the media more than the losing team the media covers. I think that feeds my frustration even more. I find it unbelievable that people get upset over negative things are said about the Sabres when they lose as much as they do.

There are many things in life to get mad about. Sports is way down that list.

 

[Sabre Dance]

There are many things in life to get mad about. Sports is way down that list.

Sabres mean a lot to me. I want the Sabres to win. I could care less if Darcy Regier wins.

These types of threads get me going because its almost like people are saying the Sabres dont deserve the negative bias that some media have against them.