Comments on: Mike and Mike Don’t Need Roads Where They’re Going

By: Pete

Pete — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 14:12:58 +0000

[6] Yeah, their baseball knowledge is about as expansive as *my* basketball knowledge, which is pretty close to nothing since the Knicks ceased being a good team.

There’s not too many media personalities that don’t deal in awful cliches in regards to baseball — you have to go to the Ed Randalls of the world to find some speck of original thinking…

By: Mr. OK Jazz TOKYO

Mr. OK Jazz TOKYO — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 05:55:52 +0000

Unlistenable program..tried it twice and both times seemed to be all about Golic’s love of buffalo wings and “Greeny” being a wuss…do they ever talk about sports?? Bring back the classic hosts from yesteryear, where are you Art Rust Jr.??

oh..but Mike&Mike still better than Colin Cowherd..tried his show too on the ESPN podcast..yikes….how did he ever get into radio with that voice??

By: The Hawk

The Hawk — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 01:52:30 +0000

It reads like they were talking, not writing. If so, you can’t really fault the writing aspect of it. You can still fault their logic and understanding tho

By: Simone

Simone — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 23:02:09 +0000

Mike and Mike know absolutely nothing about baseball and nothing that they say should be repeated in a pubication.

By: unmoderated

unmoderated — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 22:48:43 +0000

excellent! good to see you emma.

By: Max

Max — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 20:59:48 +0000

Ha ha, nice piece Emma. I get ESPN the Magazine for free too (no idea how it suddenly started being sent to me)…I used to be embarrassed to get it, but I like some of the photography (even with the cheap paper they print on). And for better or worse, they experiment a lot with different ways of presenting a story, replete with little factoids and graphics that look very superficial to the more traditional sports fan, but seem suited to a younger, web 2.0-indoctrinated generation.

But deep analysis is certainly not their strong point. And Mike and Mike are impossibly lightweight. The magazine has to be a financial sinkhole, given how the stories are rarely timely, and everyone goes to the website for their (free) fix.

By: Mattpat11

Mattpat11 — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 20:50:33 +0000

As a non fan who only occasionally pays attention to basketball, I was always under the impression that even the most inept teams are in playoff contention for most of the year.

By: rbj

rbj — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:35:49 +0000

“If a one-legged man wins a race using a prosthesis, it’s inspirational, but that doesn’t mean you should train for your next 5K by cutting off one of your legs.”

Ooops.

Since 1994 don’t the Yankees have something like the best or second best record in baseball? Granted, that’s the last 15 years and not the last 20, but still. And this past year was the first time they haven’t made the playoffs since 1994, in a sport where only the division winners and 2 other teams make it, unlike basketball where everybody but the most inept teams make it. If you can trade your young, unproven talent for good, proven talent I don’t think that’s a bad thing. Nor is it necessarily bad if you can buy talent and win with it.

By: Mattpat11

Mattpat11 — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 17:52:56 +0000

I’ll never understand how the desire to win every year became a negative.