Last week I mentioned the media portion of the Channel Media and Market Research poll. Thanks to two readers who each sent me a full copy of the poll, here is the complete media section of the survey.

http://www.bostonsportsmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2014-NE-Sports-Survey.pdf

 

Advertisements

34 thoughts on “Full Media Portion of Channel Media and Market Research Poll

  1. Thanks, Bruce, and thanks to the folks who sent it in.

    Did they run the same questions as last year? (It’d be fun to compare Y-t-Y data.)

    Always interesting results here but I guess I’m not surprised because of “TV exposure”.

  2. Good Lord, Tony Mazz the favorite radio personality? With
    poll results like this its no wonder our local sports shows are so bad.
    Really, what does he bring to the table? He does not provide the balance Felger needs to make a good show.
    Bertrand is much more capable of taking on Felger and he’s just the
    flash guy. I would have put Felger on top even though his contrarian schtick gets tiresome, esp during the football season.

    1. I enjoyed hearing Bedard yesterday. He bring unparalleled football knowledge especially on a national level. Loved him challenging Felger. The first time I think I’ve heard that done. Unfortunately Felger was so annoying that I couldn’t listen as long as I would have liked. His thing yesterday was how how the Pats were proven correct in their assessment of Welker (damaged goods), so why did they outbid the Broncos for his services? Why offer him anything? I can’t seem to recall him saying that last year when he was beating up Reiss. Click…time for me to hear the weather and traffic instead.

      1. I liked the fact that he didn’t get sucked into Mazz’s hysteria more than him challenging Felger. You could almost hear the “will you settle the F down” weight in his comments. Talking about Mankins and Jimmy G and Mazz was all worked up and Greg was calm and collected. That seemed to fluster Mazz for some reason…lol

    2. Let me start by saying Bedard is better than Bert Breer. Having said that Bedard has more than a little of that Globe anti Belichick, anti Kraft agenda in him so it will be interesting to see how that segment evolves. I listened to most of it yesterday and I was really happy I did not have to listen to Felger trying to decipher a Wiggens “street” text or listen to the insufferable 10 questions with Wiggy segment.

      I think 98.5 is smart having a large football centered block on Tuesdays during drive. I would like to see them with a similar set up on Thursdays (maybe have Gasper be the 3rd man in), like the baseball reporters show, I think the dedicated football two hours focuses both Felger but more importantly Mazz on a specific topic, for which he can do research, which in turn allows him and the show not to suck.

      1. The one “redeeming” thing for what I heard on the 2-3 before I switched was Bedard shoot down the “cap is crap” garbage. To push a factually incorrect argument based on an premise that you’ve admitted is false just drives me nuts. We can debate the opinion stuff all day but, man, at least start from somewhere we can have a an intelligent debate. (Again, just my taste.)

        I’ll trash MMQB all day for PK, but Bedard isn’t the worst out there and is clearly fed good intel + knows the game.

        Should work out well for them, I think.

        1. Felger’s rant about “real money” and “fake money” is very entertaining. He makes it sound like the league office covers the portions of the contracts that fall into the latter category and that the Pats always cut these guys as soon as “Kraft has to reach into his own pocket.”

          1. I don’t know if it was the same thing but I heard him talking about cash vs. cap. Bashing the Pat’s because they are near the bottom of the league in terms of 2014 cash spending – and hence they are cheap according to Felgie.

            Here’s where his argument is flawed. If they are near the bottom of cash outlay this year it’s because they paid out more in bonuses the previous years. Bonuses are cash but can be prorated across the life of the contract to lower the cap hit. In fact in 2010 and 2012 they were the 2nd highest in cash spending. I’m sure Felgie mentioned this (crickets). Even if they wanted to pay out more cash this year, to shut Felger up, they couldn’t because they are up against the cap number.

            I don’t find him as entertaining as I do irritating – like someone with an axe to grind. He always has an agenda.

  3. Can we be perfectly honest here….the worst “personality” on any radio or television show in this nation is Andy Gresh. Just the sound of his voice is enough to make me turn the station. He has no idea what he’s talking about when it comes to football. He makes himself out to be some former college superstar, he was a third string lineman at URI ! Put Bob Nuemier with Zo in the afternoons….anybody but Gresh!

    1. I’ll admit I don’t listen much to Gresh, but he seems like quite a counter to the non-stop Pats bashing that virtually every host on the station not on his show spews. I’ll happily take that even if he isn’t as smart as he thinks he is.

      1. this is why I like Gresh and Zo. They’re unapologetic homers and that’s a refreshing change of pace to the anti-Belicheck agenda that follows on the two subsequent shows. F&M are hard to swallow during football season which is why I wish 985 had put someone next to Felger that could offer balance. And Gresh knows a hell of a lot more about football than any of the other hosts on 985 or weei excepting Zolak of course. His voice is bad but no worse than Mazz’s.

  4. Several thoughts on this Sunny Wednesday…

    – Tony Mazz is the most popular radio personality in Boston. The survey says so, therefore it is. Here is the thing about Mazz. When he wants to and when he does his homework he is excellent. I have maintained for years that the Baseball Reporters is the best hour on Boston radio and I still think that even after this summer. I think Mazz playing second banana to Felger rubs people the wrong way as I think they want him to challenge Felger more. That is what he did on the Big Show…”but Glen, but, but but” and I think they knew going in he had to play a different role. Between the high screeching voice and the incessant YARMing Mazz comes across as relatable. I think people like that about him. Personally I wish the F&M show was more like the Baseball reporters. It isn’t. But I think Mazz as a whole does a pretty good job (the ratings would agree with me) and as such I can understand why people might vote for him as best radio personality.

    – Wes Welker did not drop MDMA for the first time at the derby. We will never know unless BB writes a tell all…which will not happen…but I am guessing Wes Welker was more of a problem to the Patriots than we knew. Further, I wonder what stipulations were in the offer he turned down that was reputedly worth more than he received in Denver. Further, I wonder knowing what we know now about both his medical history and his off field lifestyle, how much the organization and his fellow players really wanted him back versus how much they wanted there to be a perception that he was not chased out the door. it sure looks to me like the Pats knew what they were doing moving on.

    – Lastly, the Sox are 61-77 with 24 games left. It is entirely possible they will go 8-16 in the last 24 games and end up with 69 wins. If that happens does Farrell get fired? Does it prove that the Toronto experience was a more accurate predictor of his ability to lead a team than last years lightning in a bottle fluke? What does this say about the front office and its ability to evaluate talent? Lastly, why is no one on the radio discussing this? If this was prior to 2004 the Patriots would be an afterthought. A throw away line by Jackie M about trading Rondo (or a similar player) would get no coverage. The Globe and Herald would be filled with “fire Farrell” articles and WEEI (there was no 98.5) would be wall to wall Sox epic failure. Things have certainly changed in this town and this stodgy old curmudgeon does not think it was for the best.

    1. Were you going for satire on the topic of Mazz?
      Let’s not get carried away with the Welker stuff. Other than the foot press conference, the guy was a company man. He was tight with Brady off the field too. Highly doubt TB would allign himself with a locker room or off-the-field problem child. I think the Pats’ offer was based on the market for receivers, Welker’s play in the clutch, and the possibility of injuries catching up to him at his age. BB has a knack for knowing a veteran player’s value. End of story.
      I think the lack of Red Sox talk is a reflection of the fans’ apathy towards the team.

    2. Baseball on-field managers still get way too much credit for wins and take way too much blame for losses.

      When Farrell didn’t MoY of the Year, some people went ballistic. (Some) Media and fans attacked that one voter from Seattle for a couple of weeks. It was all very funny.

    3. The fact it’s September 3rd and there is STILL 24 games left in the baseball season blows my mind. Baseball is too f–king long on every level. On the field, the season, the post-season. No wonder this sport is dying.

    4. First, i thought the Baseball Reporters was fine (not great) until it basically became just one reporter, Mazz. He certainly wasn’t as dreadful as he is now but would still whine about not signing Teixeria and the like. He was also still actively covering Sox and thus less likely to say players “suck.”

      Second, if the Patriots front office didn’t know Hernandez was a mass murderer, then how would they know Welker was taking recreational drugs in the off season (or whenever)?

    5. Mazz can be fine when his criticism of the team is well placed, I haven’t had any problems with his performance on the baseball reporters this season. The Sox deserve the criticism. But last year was quite tiresome with his endless doubting over everything the team did when it was very, very clear that they were a far better team than they were in 2012 and were going to finish a lot better. On F&M combine this with the fact that he knows nothing whatsoever about football, basketball or hockey and he comes off as quite dreadful. Felger carries F&M and is the prime reason why that show gets good ratings. Felger also can come off as extremely arrogant all the time, so I can see some merit to viewing Mazz as more relatable. Its not Mazz being good or deserving it; he is on the highest sports show in the market and Felger rubs people off the same way so Mazz gets the benefit from it. That’s the only reason I can think of as to why Mazz got #1 in this.

  5. Jackie Mac, echoing what many others have already said, “In the long term, the Mankins trade might have merit, but in the short term it did not make New England better, not on the field or in the locker room.”

    But what if it does? What if the coaches identified Mankins as a weak link, or what if Kline is simply already as good, or god forbid, already better? What will Jackie and the rest of them say, that it was a stroke of luck, not careful planning? If Jackie is such an expert on offensive line play, why was she not considered as a replacement for Scarnecchia?

    1. MacMullan is in the same category as Bob Ryan. A once respected columnist who has decided to sully her reputation by selling out with an unnecessary late career move into high profile, low brow, sensationalist sports commentary.

      Her latest column for ESPN is titled “Can Bill Belichick hear clock ticking?” I didn’t even bother to read beyond that. Tripe.

        1. HOW DARE YOU CHALLENGE THE PRESEASON EVALUATIONS OF THE BOSTON MEDIA AND DARE TO SUGGEST THAT A REAL TEST BE USED TO EVALUATE A TRADE!

    2. This has been the argument I have been making to friends since the Mankins trade. What if Belichick sees that Mankins is no better than any of the other guards on the roster. He asked him to take a pay cut to put him in line with the other guards. Mankins said no. Belichick traded him before he was exposed as not being as good as he used to be. If it turns out Belichick was right…shame on Tampa for not properly scouting. Shame on reporters like Jackie Mac who report rumors, innuendo and the gospel rather than doing the footwork needed to be an accurate reporter.

  6. Whenever the Pats win a championship again, the media and the haters will come up with some reason to bash it anyway. I’d happily have taken either or both of those championships because the non-stop bashing of them would be taking place regardless of this Welker story.

    1. Very true.
      I’m old enough to remember the last time Boston had a pro sports team that was a championship contender just about every single year for an entire decade–the Celtics of the 80s. I must say, I do not remember that team being criticized very much by the media, even though they left a handful of winnable championships on the table during that decade and the front office failed to make a single major move after acquiring Bill Walton for the magical one-season run that was 1985-86. In fact, after the tragic loss of Len Bias, the front office became utterly sclerotic, largely because their hands were tied due to poor salary cap management. Meanwhile, their arch-rivals out in LA were somehow always able to make a semi-major move that would help them stay in the title hunt. Yet Auerbach, Volk and Co. were largely spared heavy media criticism even while the team was obviously aging and decaying before our very eyes.
      I guess the main question is why? Has sports “journalism” changed all that much in the last 25-plus years, or are the BB/Kraft Patriots a unique case study: The perfect storm, if you will, of a successful franchise being run by men the media loathe? In the case of BB, it’s just about everyone in the media; in the case of Kraft, it’s a certain few media members with personal axes to grind (the CHB) or agendas to push (Felger).

      1. I’m too young to know much about the 80s Celtics and their media treatment, but why do the Pats get such criticism? Seems pretty common sense to me.
        1)Belichick’s personality and the fact that he and his coaches and players do not do the media’s job for them. Especially in comparison with previous coaches like Parcells.
        2)Personal agendas against the Krafts and Belichick, such as not inviting a media member to an event (Shaughnessy), trading away a beloved player or source (Borges), or humiliating said media “expert” who predicted terrible things to befall the Pats only for that to not happen.
        3) They think being a contrarian will make them popular. Patriots are the most successful team in pro sports the last 15 years. So they’ll make a name for themselves by bashing them to death non-stop. Problem is this has grown from just being Felger and a few stragglers to the large majority of the media.

  7. Well, fans will be fans, but the media, in my opinion, goes ballistic whenever the Pats are suspected of doing something wrong, or being associated with someone doing something wrong. I mean, more than one media jackal has implied that they knew Hernandez was a mass murderer while he was still playing for them in 2012, without a trace of evidence to back up the claim. Those who haven’t accused them of “knowing” about Hernandez’s activities have bashed them for drafting him in the first place, because they “should have known” he was capable of becoming a serial killer–another utterly ridiculous premise. Of course, “Spygate”, the single most overblown story in sports history, will NEVER go away because the media won’t let it go away. With the Seahawks, PEDs, breaking the practice rules, etc….those stories barely caused a ripple on the media’s Richter scale. Even the Saints’ “bounty” scandal has pretty much faded completely from the media landscape, and some in the media even got behind Payton’s and the organization’s counter-arguments and challenges to the NFL’s ruling. No one in the media ever felt the need to give BB and the Pats their “day in court” over “Spygate”, which endures to this day. And it’s all because of the media’s unrelenting and childish hate for Belichick. It’s pretty pathetic.

  8. Yes I agree that is probably a big part of it. A lot of people are still steeped in the pre-2004 mentality. However I don’t think the obsession with the manager is something that only goes on around here. It’s an MLB wide thing. It’s the announcers, it’s the media, it’s everywhere. It’s an old tradition that will die hard. A lot of people love the idea of “manufactured” runs.

Comments are closed.