Bob McCown vs. Bill Watters

Published January 10, 2008 @ 20:59 in Radio

radioBetween 5 and 5:30 I'm often in my car. Usually when I'm in my car, I'm listening to the radio. I go old school and listen to good ol' terrestrial radio. You know, that AM / FM stuff you've heard your parents talk about.

On the AM dial, I listen to Bob McCown's Prime Time Sports on The Fan 590. Love him or hate him, McCown puts together an intriguing radio show. There's no one better on the entire AM dial, if you ask me.

Recently, a little to the right at AM 640, Bill Watters got his own sports show to compete with McCown. I tried it out, returned when my buddy Fred co-hosted, and gave it another ten minutes earlier this week. The fact is, I find it sloppy and boring and about 10% as good as Prime Time Sports.

Is anybody listening to Watters over McCown?

16 Responses to "Bob McCown vs. Bill Watters"

Trackback Address

james edgar
January 11, 2008 / 07:52

McCown is way better than the show on 640. Not necessarily better than Watters because he has his moments but as you say the show is sloppy. I'm usally in the car from 4:30 -5:45 I like watters show before 4:45 because bob's callers are often quite daft but after that it blows 640 off the air.I did listen when Fred was on and would have become a regular if he had the gig but I don't have any expectation that the Bill Watters show will be on past the spring.

Andrew
January 11, 2008 / 08:13

As many have said, Watters is too Leaf focused. He seems to be a Leaf homer through and through and cna't offer truly insightful comments into the organization without fear of ticking off someone. His knowledghe of sports pretty much ends at hockey and most people want more.

If 640 was smart they would bring back Stafford. He was good counter programing to McCowan. The city doesn't need two sports programs on the radio. "THE TEAM" failed on that premise.

Fredericton Steve
January 11, 2008 / 08:13

Bob McCown makes me want to vomit.

Doug
January 11, 2008 / 08:38

Bill Watters is nothing without Jeff Marek. When he left, the show lost the quarterback that Bill Watters so desparately needs.

Argie
January 11, 2008 / 09:46

I agree McCown has better content in terms of guests and the variety of sports they cover. However, when he starts talking about his personal life and shilling his book I immediately turn the dial to Watters. I also like Watters’ new host Greg Brady. He seems to know his stuff and not just hockey stuff.

Another thing that bugs me about McCown’s show is that he insists on having his buddies as guest hosts (see Jim Kelley who never shuts up). His other buddy Stephen Brunt is just plain boring and a too left wing.

Toronto Mike
January 11, 2008 / 09:47

Andrew, I agree. When you're not in a sports mood, Stafford is a great option. He's smart, funny and interesting.

Stafford is best when he's having fun. His calls with city councillors bore the crap out of me.

Toronto Mike
January 11, 2008 / 10:06

McCown isn't perfect, and I can see why some hate him, but I think he made a good call recruiting Kelley and Brunt. They're both good complements and Kelley may talk a lot but he knows his hockey. Brunt is one of the best in the biz, as far as I'm concerned.

Andrew
January 11, 2008 / 10:22

McCowan's commercials are terrible. When my wife watched the first one she said, "Who's this loser?" He TV image is very poor.

Mike, I don't like Stafford's interviews either. Toronto City Council doesn't interest me.

Andrew
January 11, 2008 / 10:43

I keep spelling McCowan wrong. It is McCown. Oops.

Al
January 11, 2008 / 13:23

McCown's show is the best thing on the air IMHO. I love that he doesn't do the usual player interviews. He's insightful and intelligent. Watters is too much of a homer. I liked him better on the FAN when he didn't have to lick MLSE's balls. I can't stand listening to one minute of his show on 640. Love him or hate him, McCown offers more quality and info on all sport, not just hockey.

Jer
April 9, 2008 / 09:49

simply put, the bobcat has a wider range that he talks about.

If you want leafs info...go to mr. watters, if you want sports talk McCown's your man.

dave
May 2, 2008 / 17:29

Want to talk baseball with Bob--this city's sports demagogue. Do the following:

1: Refer to the thirty-seven, fifty-nine, or eighty-four third basemen brought in by Ricciardi. It doesn't matter if the real number--excluding subs--is something like three or four. The higher the number, the more Bob likes you.

2: Say something like, "This guy hasn't done/brought in anyone." Bob likes that. Don't mention Lind, Hill, Purcey, Snider, Cecil, Marcum, Litsch, Accardo, Tallet, Downs, etc. Bob doesn't know who they are.

3: Say "I mean," and "C'mon." Say them a lot. Here's a template for you to use when you're talking to the screener: "I mean, c'mon, what' this guy doing. I mean, c'mon. Who's he drafting? C'mon, I mean."

4: Tell Bob that this team "has no one" and could never "make a run." Wells, Rios, Hill, and Overbay are .260/10/70 hitters. Not much they can do over a complete season. "How are they gonna compete with Wells and Hill? They got no one there at the corners. They, I mean, they got no one. I mean, they can't make a run."

5: Ignore everything positive about this team. The fact that they're third in the AL (and 6th in MLB) in team ERA? It doesn't matter. "C'mon, I mean, Wells isn't doing anything. C'mon."

6: Banish logic from your argument. The Jays lost two one-run games to Boston, and have already played ten one-run contests. Since they lost said games, they're awful. Had they won said games (by one run) they'd be a great defensive/pitching team.

7: Pretend that slumps never happen: Say something like, "Stairs is on pace to go .300/15/40 this year."

8: Say something that shows your baseball knowledge. Something like, "My buddies and me were talking baseball. Now we know a lot about the game. We follow it. We're experts, you know. But that there Jays third basemen, that...you know...that guy...oh, I can't remember his name. But I know a lot about baseball. Now I don't like him."

Now you're on. OK. Wind him up, and watch him go.

Sea Bass
May 3, 2008 / 23:05

Wait a sec. People are saying Watters is afraid of making comments that piss off MLSE? That he's an MLSE baglicker? I don't think those two comments could be further from the truth.

Charles
May 5, 2008 / 21:44

Don't like sports radio, don't like Bob McCowan. If Bob thinks the Bronws are so great why isn't he down in Cleveland worshiping them?

I can an do listen Bill Waters more intelligent show. Way more interesting analasys with out the 'tude.
Can't listen to Bob or bear to watch his self absorbed commercials.

tradingterry
May 8, 2008 / 10:21

I don't think Bob McCown even takes the time to watch most sports....yet he still feels he's qualified to talk about them. The guy is a sports imposter and he's got most of you fooled. I haven't listened to him in years. I am however addicted to Bill Watters shows...but I do miss Jeff Marek

Frank
May 9, 2008 / 18:15

Marek was OK but the show has clearly taken off and Brady is a more well-rounded broadcaster than Marek. Both are good...but Brady obviously is more than just a hockey-head. McCown - I agree..lazy, uninspiring and has never been challenged in this market. Well - here it comes. It'll take some time but they may be able to challenge. The issue might be Watters' age. When will he quit? But Brady and Watters have ENERGY. Does McCown get excited about anything? He never even gets angry! Just sounds bitter and sarcastic. And I agree with terry....he doesn't watch sports and doesn't LIKE the NHL!

Leave a Reply




Copyright ©1999-2008 by Michael Boon.
Sitemap - All content is licensed under a Creative Commons License.