WGR-550 Dust-up Today: Schopp vs. Capaccio!

[US Egg]

1 minute ago, Seven-N-Nine said:

A lot of people listen to him, and iirc he's one of the highest paid sports radio personalities in this area.

.....including his tips ?

Edited October 31, 2019 by I am the egg man

[Mr. WEO]

15 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

Only not as legit. 

 

 

It's no Sky Low Low vs. Kid Chocolat, that's for sure...

[BringBackFlutie]

Meh.  That seemed like a really friendly conversation to me.  The two of them are great at philosophical debate and etiquette.

[PromoTheRobot]

4 minutes ago, Seven-N-Nine said:

 

A lot of people listen to him, and iirc he's one of the highest paid sports radio personalities in this area.

 

Define a lot. His show is not top-rated. More middle of the pack. As for his salary, it's more a function of his and Bulldog's longevity. He's a known commodity.

[US Egg]

4 minutes ago, BringBackFlutie said:

The two of them are great at philosophical debate and etiquette.

Seriously ? Maybe you should go for a walk or read a book.

 

(Hi Hap....) 

 

 

[BringBackFlutie]

2 minutes ago, I am the egg man said:

Seriously ? Maybe you should go for a walk or read a book.

 

(Hi Hap....) 

 

 

 

Ha.

 

You don't have to be intelligent or knowledgeable to be good at debating or etiquette.  "Philosophical" may not be an apt term, but the lack of objectivity in the discussion led me to it.

 

 

...I haven't read a book since The Boxcar Children in like, 1992.  Books on tape are where it's at, yo!

[US Egg]

4 minutes ago, BringBackFlutie said:

Ha.

You don't have to be intelligent or knowledgeable to be good at debating or etiquette.  "Philosophical" may not be an apt term, but the lack of objectivity in the discussion led me to it.

...I haven't read a book since The Boxcar Children in like, 1992.  Books on tape are where it's at, yo!

I believe you believe in yourself.

[HOUSE]

I liked him better in Rochester when my antenna was out of range

[pup33]

I think the most heated they've been was a few years ago in the offseason talking about tanking with the Browns as the starting point. It was an intense exchange, so much so that Schopp had to ask at the end if they were still good (the relationship between them). 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

45 minutes ago, wagon127 said:

Then, why do any teams bother with running up the score? You know, the teams that are usually in the playoffs year after year. Apparently the fans of the team that never makes the playoffs, know what's more important than the coaches and players of the teams that are in the playoffs almost all the time.....

 

Seriously?   You've NEVER heard teams complain about an opponent running up the score?   

 

Belicheat and his EGO is famous for it.  

 

Even the JAGS were criticized for running up the score against the JETS. 

 

[Seven-N-Nine]

49 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

Define a lot. His show is not top-rated. More middle of the pack. As for his salary, it's more a function of his and Bulldog's longevity. He's a known commodity.

 

I heard when he was on Schopp and the Coach he was making north of $120k/year.  That was like 20 years ago...

[May Day 10]

Lots of people tune into WGR.  It probably doesnt match angry zombie radio 930, but they have what they have.  Im curious to know how much is due to a 'captive' audience.

 

 

I dont mind Schopp and appreciate his 'thoughtful approach' most of the time, although when he misses the mark with it, he misses bad.  Schopp demands evidence, past performance, and facts for the most part.  This is to a flaw sometimes because he puts zero stock in 'intangibles' like culture, development, tools, momentum, etc.  

The callers are also cringe-worthy, and with Schopp it is amplified because almost none come armed with any factual evidence to support their viewpoints.

I dont think Bulldog brings anything to the table.  

 

I like the morning show as well...

 

But overall, WGR is so stale, especially the afternoon show.  I find the late night show with whatever entry level guys they have to be refreshing, as is the weekend shows.  I also stumble on the Tim Graham show and Sullivan's show on 1270 sometimes and it is nice hearing a different format, different outlook, interviews, guests, etc.  No callers (because not a lot of people listen) is also nice.  I liked Bull's show on 1270 when it existed, although at the end he got a little hacky with his "wild jock" schtick. 

 

 

The Instigators went from being the worst thing ever with Sylvester and Peters to great in present day

 

Edited October 31, 2019 by May Day 10

[McBean]

Schoop crushed Sal.

 

Hate him or love him, Mike is 100% right.

[SCBills]

7 minutes ago, McBean said:

Schoop crushed Sal.

 

Hate him or love him, Mike is 100% right.

A lot easier to make his argument without knowing any of the facts. 
 

29 other teams didn’t trade either.  Maybe nobody was truly available..   How do we know Denver was willing to trade Sanders to us for what an NFC team gave them?   
 

Lots of unknowns.  He’s operating under the assumption guys like AJ Green and Von Miller were available for reasonable returns. 
 

We’ll have money to go after a Scherff or Nagakue in the offseason... Were they even available?.. do either of them put us over the top?   If not, why would we give up assets for guys we can make runs at in the offseason?

I can’t fathom how anyone thinks this organization isn’t in a better place than before.  Young QB, young talent, all our draft picks and a ton of cap space..  We’re actually positioned to be a contender, finally. 
 

Edited October 31, 2019 by SCBills

[jrober38]

Both guys are right.

 

The organization is run better, and that sets them up for success (as Sal is suggesting), but there aren't any tangible results that show that they've actually arrived yet (as Schopp is saying). 

[ngbills]

How are people denying that point differential means anything? No it is not the 100% rule of how good teams are; nothing is. But generally speaking after 7-8 games it shows a good correlation to how good you are. If NE is crushing teams that we are beating in a dog fight then its likely they are better than us. A one off game may not matter but if you have a decent sample size yes it does. 

[jimmy10]

1 hour ago, blacklabel said:

Schopp's playing a character. It's his job to elicit responses from people. I think the best way he's found to get those responses is to have unpopular opinions that he doesn't waver on. If he gets you riled up then he's done his job. 

Even more so when someone hypes a segment of his on an online message board (whether they suspiciously seem like an employee of WGR or not) to drive more clicks and social media heat. The low-level, local engagement matters a lot more to Mike Scope than it does Jim Rome. 

[wagon127]

1 hour ago, SlimShady'sGhost said:

 

Seriously?   You've NEVER heard teams complain about an opponent running up the score?   

 

Belicheat and his EGO is famous for it.  

 

Even the JAGS were criticized for running up the score against the JETS. 

 

Of course I heard of it. I was trying to say, that I think running up the score, helps the development of your players, and sustained success.

[Nextmanup]

15 hours ago, buffalobillswin said:

How come every local sports show has a big dog or a mad dog or a bulldog?

Funny point.

 

Frequent listeners will know that every time Schopp and Bulldog interview someone of national repute or a "big name" if you will in the world of sports or broadcasting, Bulldog ALWAYS introduces himself, or refers to himself, as "Chris" and he ditches the "Bulldog" moniker because he knows it makes him look like a rank amateur from flyover country and is embarrassed by it.

 

It's kind of funny.

 

 

[Nextmanup]

14 hours ago, Phil The Thrill said:

Sal won the debate.  Mike’s biggest metric for saying that the 2014 Bills teams are better is point differential?  GTFOH

 

No he didn't.  Sal looked pretty stupid, because he is.  

 

14 hours ago, Brianmoorman4jesus said:

I really don’t think they like eachother very much. Last year there was a time where I was listening and you could tell Sal just had enough. Schopp constantly makes very questionable statements and goes off them as if they are factual but never gets called out. Bulldog just lets him be and Sal wasn’t having it. I love it. Schopp and Jeremy are the 2 worst anywhere and I love when their bull#### gets called out

They are total polar opposites and Mike is much brighter than Sal.  They never would have sat at the same lunch table in a high school cafeteria, and Sal routinely voices opinions that go completely against Mike's views of sports.  Usually, Mike restrains himself and treats Sal with respect as a colleague, giving him much more respect than Mike would give a caller who voices the same opinion as Sal.  

 

This time it was different, which is why it stood out to me and I posted it here.

 

12 hours ago, Bangarang said:

I don’t think he has a problem with it at all. He actually encourages it. He’s stated many times that people calling in just to agree with him makes for boring radio. I think he likes a logical debate but far too often the callers provide less than that. He can be a royal prick though.

 

Of course.  Mike is very complimentary of good callers making good points that are backed up by data or logic, regardless if they agree with Mike's point of view or not.  He routinely will say "That's how it's done!" after a good phone call.  The callers he beats up on are the ones who come across as the dumbest person you know.  And that makes up a lot of their callers.  I agree, Mike can come across as an opinionated jerk; that's part of his personality .

He's still the only on-air personality at that radio station worth listening to, IMO.

 

6 hours ago, Gugny said:

 

I disagree with the  "if you've never played organized sports you have no clue" mentality.

 

But some of the longest-tenured coaches in NFL history are former players.

 

 

And the best of all time has no playing experience at all.  The view that says you must be a former athlete to comment on sports is grossly misplaced.

 

6 hours ago, Seven-N-Nine said:

 

Because why exactly? His points hit an uncomfortable nerve maybe?

 

LOL.  Yes, that is exactly it.  Mike really triggers dumb people.  I have found the lesser the intelligence, the greater the hated of S Schopp.  

 

This can be distilled into Nextmanup's Law: intelligence and hatred of Schopp vary inversely.  

 

5 hours ago, GimmeSomeProcess said:

I normally defend Mike just for the fact it’s entertaining and I can turn he dial. However, he actually said point differential is more important than wins. That is just insane

 

Are you sure about that?  His point was that luck factors into wins and losses whereas point differential is a much more detailed analysis that involves a much broader sample size.  We beat the Jets by 1 point.  If a few small little bits of luck went differently, we would have lost.  Does the "W"  we got the day truly mean we were the better team?  

 

There is so much more to it than wins and losses, or point differential.  Strength of schedule is huge, luck is huge, etc. etc.  Mike's point is that it is actually difficult to draw a conclusion about "quality of team" as that is quite an amorphous thing to quantify.  

 

1 hour ago, May Day 10 said:

Lots of people tune into WGR.  It probably doesnt match angry zombie radio 930, but they have what they have.  Im curious to know how much is due to a 'captive' audience.

 

 

I dont mind Schopp and appreciate his 'thoughtful approach' most of the time, although when he misses the mark with it, he misses bad.  Schopp demands evidence, past performance, and facts for the most part.  This is to a flaw sometimes because he puts zero stock in 'intangibles' like culture, development, tools, momentum, etc.  

The callers are also cringe-worthy, and with Schopp it is amplified because almost none come armed with any factual evidence to support their viewpoints.

I dont think Bulldog brings anything to the table.  

 

I like the morning show as well...

 

But overall, WGR is so stale, especially the afternoon show.  I find the late night show with whatever entry level guys they have to be refreshing, as is the weekend shows.  I also stumble on the Tim Graham show and Sullivan's show on 1270 sometimes and it is nice hearing a different format, different outlook, interviews, guests, etc.  No callers (because not a lot of people listen) is also nice.  I liked Bull's show on 1270 when it existed, although at the end he got a little hacky with his "wild jock" schtick. 

 

 

The Instigators went from being the worst thing ever with Sylvester and Peters to great in present day

 

 

You comments about Schopp are fairly accurate and fair.  The one thing he misses the mark on, for me, is the way in which he totally divorces psychology from athletic performance on a field.  I think it plays a huge role in the outcome of games; in Mike's world, it doesn't exist.  That's because he's a huge GAMBLER and routinely obsesses over number crunching and game theory mathematics.  He lives in a numbers world, which is funny as he is a professional broadcaster who probably never took an advanced statistics course in his life, or any sort of complex game theory mathematics course.  

 

1 hour ago, McBean said:

Schoop crushed Sal.

 

Hate him or love him, Mike is 100% right.

 

 Yes, he did crush Sal.  Straight up, Sal is not bright enough to win a debate with Mike.

 

Contrary to what others have said in this thread, the fact that Sal fancies himself as some sort of former athlete and ex high school football assistant coach has nothing to do with that.

Here is what folks at this board don't get.  When Mike and Sal engage in debate, they are not competing on a football field, nor are they competing over pure "football knowledge".  

They are competing on the field of ideas, and Sal is sorely out of place there.

 

A few weeks ago when Sal went after Howard Simon because Simon predicted a Bills loss to New England, I got really annoyed with Sal.  Sal kept saying "It sounds like you are settling for the loss.  I guess I am too competitive to do that."

 

And it was like "Sal, what the hell are you talking about, you idiot?"  Howard isn't on the team or coaching staff.  He's not a part of the Bills organization.  He's commenting on what he perceives to be the likely outcome of the game.  That has absolutely nothing to do with the concept of "settling."

Sal didn't get that.  He doesn't get a lot of things.