"Cross-Check" on CSN with Felger & Milbury

[Gordoff]

I'm not arguing with you. I give credit to Felger for doing this; I just wish he'd educate himself a bit more and rely a bit less on ****-stirring. But he probably can't help himself. - as the scorpion told the frog, it's his nature.

Felger means well but he needs to evolve his thoughts more and when he realizes that he's wrong he just keeps going...

 

[Therick67]

I'm not arguing with you. I give credit to Felger for doing this; I just wish he'd educate himself a bit more and rely a bit less on ****-stirring. But he probably can't help himself. - as the scorpion told the frog, it's his nature.

No worries. Felger clearly has his faults, no doubt about it. I just think he's trying to
push the hockey talk. Something you can't say about most of the media in this town. If his shows get good rattings, other's will follow suit and talking hockey will get better for it.

it's like sex...bad sex is better than none at all

 

[Alicat]

I'm not arguing with you. I give credit to Felger for doing this; I just wish he'd educate himself a bit more and rely a bit less on ****-stirring. But he probably can't help himself. - as the scorpion told the frog, it's his nature.

Felger got his start in Boston covering the Bruins from 1997 - 1999. He's very knowledgeable about hockey so don't sell him short.

 

[Artemis]

Felger got his start in Boston covering the Bruins from 1997 - 1999. He's very knowledgeable about hockey so don't sell him short.

I've heard him talk about hockey. He's not "very knowledgeable." He knows more than other radio guys in Boston, which isn't saying much.

 

[DarrenBanks56]

I've heard him talk about hockey. He's not "very knowledgeable." He knows more than other radio guys in Boston, which isn't saying much.

thats his schtick.
ive talked to him many times off air and he knows his stuff

 

[Concessionaire]

I have a soft spot for Felger. Listening to his show with Massarotti was a ritual for me throughout the 2011 Cup run. That was fun.

 

[Alicat]

I've heard him talk about hockey. He's not "very knowledgeable." He knows more than other radio guys in Boston, which isn't saying much.

So because he isn't up to your rediculous standards you're going to discredit him? Give me a break.

I'm willing to bet he's far more knowledgeable than you. Fact not opinion.

 

[Artemis]

So because he isn't up to your rediculous standards you're going to discredit him? Give me a break.

I'm willing to bet he's far more knowledgeable than you. Fact not opinion.

Ridiculous standards? Are you kidding? Is it ridiculous standards to understand that Chara is the premier shutdown defenseman in the NHL and a captain his teammates admire and respect? Is it ridiculous standards to have a grasp of the salary cap, and understand that you don't trade a lottery pick for a rental who will be paid the equal of a small country's GNP? Is it ridiculous standards to understand that Julien is a damn good coach, no matter what he looks like?

Felger is very, very good at recognizing the zeitgeist and riding the concurrent waves. He's great at saying provocative stuff about other fanbases. He's a terrific radio host for getting people stirred up and calling in. He is NOT good at understanding the nuts and bolts of hockey, on the ice, behind the bench or in the front office.

It really isn't that difficult to understand hockey or the NHL, but Felger doesn't care. Really, there's no reason why he should, because those of us who would love some solid, intelligent hockey talk are not in the majority.

And please, "fact not opinion"? Seriously?

 

[Bone for your jar]

So because he isn't up to your rediculous standards you're going to discredit him? Give me a break.

I'm willing to bet he's far more knowledgeable than you. Fact not opinion.

Just yesterday he said on the air that the B's have more points than any other team in the NHL. You don't have to have ridiculous standards to raise an eyebrow at that.

Look, I think every poster here has formed a general opinion on Felger, and we're not about to persuade each other out of it. I happen to think his hockey knowledge is nowhere near that of a hockey specialist (such as Haggs, Dupont, Edwards, let's not even mention the likes of McGuire), and lower than that of most regular posters to this board. On the other hand, I think his ability to express passion about the game is very high, higher even than many of the pundits. On balance, I can enjoy him because I enjoy his qualities, and feel that I can easily tolerate his shortcomings because (a) I have adjusted my expectations regarding his knowledge; (b) if I want hard-core hockey analysis on the radio, I know where to go (north of the border); and (c) he really doesn't take himself all that seriously. But having written all that, I realize none of that matters to his detractors, and I'm not converting anyone.

So, perhaps we should try to debate Felger matters not in general terms ("he rocks", "he sucks", "he knows nothing", "he's a seasoned hockey head", etc) but in terms of specifics. In other words, if we're going to critique OR praise him, let it be regarding specific things he says or does, because there I think we can have a more fruitful discussion that doesn't simply rehash our stances on the guy (which I'm guilty of doing in this very post).

A modest proposal.

 

[lopey]

They do stream online (though you have to put up with a bunch of loathsome Progressive ads that repeat half a dozen times in a row).

Yeah but I can't get it in Canada.

 

[Bone for your jar]

Yeah but I can't get it in Canada.

Oh, I see. I believe you can use an internet proxy service to get around this, but I don't know what the costs would be.

 

[ProdigalFan]

Replay again at 8pm tonight on CSN.