September 5, 2025 • 38 mins
Doug riffs on the Clippers' "scandal". Doug reacts to Nick Wright's take on the Red Zone channel. Doug chooses among deserving candidates Jason Stewart deems as most annoying. Jason Kelce makes today's installment of "Because We Can".
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
All right, right, this is the Doug Gottlieb Show. Heres
in the Bonus with Doug gottli.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
What Up, Doug gott Leap Show, Fox Sports Radio, iHeartRadio.
How you doing. So? Pablo Tori has done it again.
This was about a month and a half ago, maybe
two months ago. He exposed this, these allegations of collusion
(00:31):
between the NFL and the NFLPA. And it's interesting because
out of that investigation, if you read all that stuff,
you're like, yeah, it feels close, but not really that close,
and nothing happened to anybody in the NFL. On the
other hand, the NFLPA, you had mass resignations. Now I
don't know if it's from that, people complaining about the
(00:51):
the collective bard and agreement what it is. There's some
corruption as well, all those things. But Pablo Torri is
now he's gone on his own, He has his own
sh and he does some of this investigative journalism. And
the newest one was uncovering some now defunct media business,
digital business or whatever that allegedly paid Kawhi lettered like
(01:16):
twenty eight million dollars in a year for not doing anything,
or twenty million dollars total for not was like seven
million years, four years for not doing anything. And the
the assumption and the accusations are that this was like
under the tables, sweet sweetening of the deal in order
to get Kawhi letter to come to the Clippers from
(01:37):
the Raptors. Bomber went on ESPN today and denied all
of it and has actually encouraged them to investigate to
make sure he didn't do anything wrong. So there's a
bunch of things to it. One, Pabulatory is very very bright.
I don't think there's any argument it. It's not because
he went to Harvard. I know, guys we went to
Harvard that are still pretty bright, but not exceedingly bright.
(01:59):
He might be at too smart for sports. I've always
thought that, but in this realm, obviously that's where he
can excel in that kind of investigative journalism sort of thing.
And then he had Mark Cuban on earlier today as well.
Cuban and him went back and forth on social media.
So I don't know, I do know. I don't think
(02:22):
this is a complete nothing burger, but mostly a nothing burger.
On the other hand, with you know, sixty minutes so
to being in shambles, and East sixty going away. The
world does need somebody to check the checks and balances,
and if that's where his podcast goes, I think it
could be rewarding. The issue becomes that here's how it
(02:44):
feels to me. It feels a lot like a certain
portion of our of the demographic who votes who always
assumes that there's something nefarious at work. And that's both sides.
That there can't just be the story. There has to
be something behind the story. And even when you're presented
(03:06):
with data, with facts, with you know, with subpoenas, with
sword testimony, and it shows that your assumptions were in
fact false, there's either there's no my bad or the
my bads are completely overwhelmed by the initial accusations of
the story. And I think that's wrong. This one, to me,
(03:27):
does it smell a little funny? It does? Does it?
Is it explainable? It is? Do I believe it as
of now?
Speaker 3 (03:33):
I do?
Speaker 2 (03:36):
But if there's a podcast or with him and Balmer,
if there's a day in court and he is, he
comes off of his horse and says, you know what,
I was wrong about this thing. I made some assumptions
based upon what I saw in these documents. But again,
like what you're saying actually makes sense, It doesn't help
with anybody, you know, it doesn't help within it because
(03:59):
people are convinced that everything's bad, everyone's on the take,
everything's fake, nothing's actually real, and all scientific data doesn't
make it, isn't, isn't worthy of being called scientific data.
That's where we are as society. So I guess what
I'm saying is I appreciate what Pablo's doing. I respect it,
but I don't think it it's gonna land where it
(04:20):
should land with the common sports public. The common sports
public is going to look at these two stories and go, like,
see everybody's out against anybody else, on students making money,
gender issues, whatever, It just becomes kind of nationwide sports
wide victim.
Speaker 1 (04:36):
Be sure to catch live editions of The Doug Gottlieb
Show weekdays at three pm Eastern noon Pacific on Fox
Sports Radio and the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 2 (04:49):
Let's get to what the Foxes and Now every day
at this time Doug Gotlieb Show. In the one is
podcast played for your portion of previous show Fox Sports Radio,
Fox Sports One. Here's Brady Quinn talking about the spitting
incident last night before the game.
Speaker 4 (05:05):
I already heard conversation about, well, Jalen Carter spit on
Dak Prescott. Dak Prescott spit towards Jalen Carter on the ground.
There's a difference, which I one hundred percent agree with that.
But I would say once the video came out from
(05:25):
Dak spitting towards Jalen Carter on the ground, that's how
That's how like fights start where it escalates, right, and
then you get someone who comes back and retaliates. They
they won up it like a little bit more. And
typically if you get spin on what are you gonna do?
Speaker 5 (05:41):
Knock the dude out? No, you knock the dude out?
Speaker 4 (05:44):
Yeah, that's yeah, something crazy, something crazy. So that's where
I kind of look at it and say it to
me watching the game, I understand that it qualifies for
being disqualified for what Jalen Carter did before we've even
played a damn play of the entire season. We can't
just give the guy a penalty for you know, fifteen
(06:05):
yard penalty and warn him and make sure we know
the entire story, because in this shows like, all right,
that was a really stupid move by Jayleen Carter. Probably
still is to some degree. But now I'm like, all right,
I don't know what Dak said. It looked like he
you know, motivated him a little bit to walk over
and then who knows what was said between the two
before that. And I'm not saying it's ever cool or
(06:26):
okay if you lose your cool like that, but I
don't know.
Speaker 2 (06:30):
It looked like Dak was, I.
Speaker 4 (06:32):
Don't know, maybe drawing him into it.
Speaker 6 (06:36):
Hmm.
Speaker 2 (06:40):
I actually agree with Brady hear, I do. But they
always catch the second guy, right, And I think that
Dak while he's like, I spit all the time, you know,
and I spit like whatever, when you see it, you're like,
it kind of did look like he sort of did
the spit at him, and like Jalen Carter's like, I
but whatever, they caught the second guy. You got to
know better. And let's also like we're only focusing on
(07:03):
the spitting thing. Remember the play, the Cowboys are huddling,
the Eagles are behind the football on defense getting ready
for the first play, right, and he's the one standing
by the Cowboys huddle. So before we like absolve Jalen
Carter because he may have overreacted to Dak Prescott spitting
in his general direction. Go into your huddle, get the
(07:25):
frick out of the Cowboys huddle. This is uh Nick
Wright talking about the Red Zone channel, and it.
Speaker 7 (07:33):
Is time we all start watching the NFL like adults.
So here is the misinformation. There are gonna be a
few commercials on red Zone this year. People are blaming ESPN. Listen,
I'm not above taking shots of the competition. This ain't
on them though they haven't. They don't own it yet,
they haven't taken it over yet. And by the way,
(07:55):
if you were paying attention to Red Zone last year,
they already did this. There are commercials on red Zone
a couple of weekends last year. Are we gonna miss
any of the game. No, there's gonna go split screen
four times for fifteen seconds each and show you a
Burger King ad while you're watching the game. Split screen.
Speaker 1 (08:12):
That's it.
Speaker 7 (08:13):
That's all that's gonna happen. And honestly, we've been spoiled
by having Red Zone as we've had it the last
twenty years anyway, So everyone stopped whinding. But that's not
really the take. The take is this, and this is controversial.
This night put in my bones everyone knows.
Speaker 3 (08:27):
I'm that.
Speaker 7 (08:29):
You cannot be a self respecting, die hard NFL fan
if the only way you consume football is through red zone.
Watch a whole game like an adult second screen supplementary
on your computer. Fine, but don't tell me you love
the NBA, Like, what game do you watch last night? Now,
(08:49):
it's just bleed to report speeds, all some highlights. You
don't learn anything. You don't know anything, and sports media
you can't cover the league if you're just watching red zones.
We got to learn, coach, how a team matriculated the
ball down the field, not just the candy of the
touchdowns and the turnovers and the font returns. So if
you are a true football fan, throw on a full game,
(09:13):
have red zone secondary, whether it's on your phone, computer screen,
if you have multi TV setup, that's fine. And if
you're just a casual fan just following fantasy, no problem.
But don't try to get in football arguments or football
discussions if you haven't seen a team run a second
and thirteen from their own twenty yard line in thirty years.
Speaker 2 (09:35):
Jay stun I had a great conversation about this because
because we both believe that we both believe that the
whole red zone thing got started because of fantasy football.
As a matter of fact, at the end of every
red zone Sunday they show every touchdown. Why because touchdowns,
(09:57):
above all else are how you win fantasy football. So
I like, I kind of think that I don't kind
of think. I do think that while Nick is super
clever with his words and making fun of people like myself,
that you can consume a lot more football that way,
but especially all of these fantasy football owners and telling
(10:20):
them they need to be adults. Like that type of condescension.
Is it tracks? Okay, I've been guilty of it on
some level myself, but it's also you're like thumbing your
nose at the lifeblood of the NFL. The lifeblood of
the NFL. Listen, if they really want to make money
on the red zone, they need to continue to do
(10:41):
the exact same thing, only start to factor in betting odds,
like that's where you do fantasy and betting odds. Now
you're killing it. As for the ads, I understand that
there's a small amount of ads fifteen second ads here there,
there are sometimes NYCREB. The problem with it is the
(11:02):
entire sale of red zone is commercial free, commercial free,
and you can say ESPN can say, hey, we ain't
got nothing to do with it. The reality is that
all of these things can be mandated when it's put
onto a contract. If ESPN didn't want commercials on red Zone,
(11:25):
you know what, they could have said, we will not
do this deal combining with the NFL network if there
are commercials with red Zone. So I think that part
is bullshit.
Speaker 8 (11:38):
Just do.
Speaker 2 (11:39):
And I love the red Zone and I'm glad that it's,
you know, gonna be part of this new package. And
I know you can sneak in commercials. And the problem
with sneaking in commercials is not hey we can avoid games,
we can sneak them in here or there. It's once
you open Pandora's box and you start making money, and commercials,
well you can make now you can do whatever you want.
You're like, well, we already had commercials. We just expand I.
Speaker 5 (12:01):
Think that there's a there's a conversation here of considering
the source, right. I think Nick writes vantage point needs
to be considered. He works in sports, and by all accounts,
I've worked with people that work directly with him. I
know his reputation like no one works harder in our
(12:23):
industry than Nick Wright, and that's a huge compliment. I
respect the work even that take right there, that angle
on this is something we you just don't hear. He
found a new angle of a story this week and
he and he said something funny about it. The problem
is is that it's very egocentric. It's like he's coming
at it from a place of like, I talk sports
(12:44):
for a living, so I need to watch every game,
so you should do the same because you want to
be a man. Ninety nine point nine to nine percent
of people don't talk sports for a living. That's the problem.
Ninety nine point nine to nine percent of the people
have other things to do in their lives. They have families,
they have commitments, they have jobs, and they just they
(13:07):
only have a certain amount of bandwidth on a Sunday
to consume sports, and this is how they do it.
So Nick Wright's take is I think is is good.
It's just very ego centric. He can't see the forest
beyond the trees on this. The red zone meets a
purpose for both fantasy and gambling, I think, and I
(13:27):
think that's why it's so popular. So that's the issue
I have with neck, but I do. I do enjoy
his takes. I do.
Speaker 2 (13:34):
I do as well, not all of them, I mean,
don't agree with them all, but you can still enjoy.
I enjoy some takes that I don't I vehemently disagree with,
because I do think they're well thought out. I do
think most of them are well thought out. Here's Dan
Patrick talking about the Chargers Chiefs game tonight in Brazil.
Speaker 3 (13:50):
You have the Chiefs and the Chargers in Brazil. Now
here's the problem I have with this. I know, I
know we're getting to you know, global expansion here, but
the fact that the Chargers in Chiefs, a divisional rivalry
game is going to be played in Brazil is malpractice.
I mean, that's terrible because that should be played in
(14:12):
Los Angeles, or if it was going to be played
in Kansas City. This is a divisional game, and I
don't think the fans in Brazil were going to go, hey,
we better get an opening game, we better get a
Week one game. I'm not anti international. What I am
anti is a divisional game we're going to export and.
Speaker 2 (14:32):
It's Week one.
Speaker 3 (14:34):
You can't do that to the Chiefs and they charge
your fans this Week seven and then you have a
bye week. If you want to do it that way,
then I think it's fair to all involved. You can
still have games there, but let's not have opening day
or their first week, their first game a divisional game,
and you're going to play it in Brazil.
Speaker 2 (14:56):
There's another side to it. So the first thing is
you have seventeen games, so you have an unbalanced schedule
home versus road. So you're not actually losing a home
game per se. Right, So we're pretty clear on that.
Speaker 5 (15:09):
What was that? Explain that again?
Speaker 2 (15:11):
How many games do we play in an NFL season?
Speaker 5 (15:14):
Seventeen?
Speaker 2 (15:15):
Right, so you have an you haven't imbalance in your schedule, right,
You're not gonna have the same number of home as
road correct.
Speaker 5 (15:23):
No, but this point is that it's a home game
against a division opponent.
Speaker 2 (15:26):
I get it. I understand, okay, but you know I don't.
I wouldn't like it either if forget about Charger fans.
If I was the Chargers, you know, you lose, and
I guess you could say you lose home field advantage.
The only thing is, like I've been to that game
at so far, it's not really a Charger home game, right,
And you know again, this is the give back to
(15:47):
the league. This is the kickback to the league. And
where you say, like, well, where's the bonus in it,
where's the benefit in it? Well, the league last year
made what four hundred and like thirty million dollars for
each team? Is that right? Is that the number that
we found from the packers. Where do you think that
money comes from? That's where it comes from. So do
(16:09):
the fans get screwed?
Speaker 8 (16:11):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (16:11):
Yeah, But the other way looking at is they have one, two, three, four, five, six,
seven eight. Yeah, so they have eight other home games.
They have the same number of home games they would
have had they lose the Chiefs game as they did.
It sucks, like that's the downside to all these international
games is you're losing a game, and sometimes you're losing
a really good one. This is one of them. The
(16:35):
upside to it is that you don't have to You're
not gonna do it every year. Chiefs are going to
do it more often than you are because they're a
more popular team and because you guys are doing it.
That's where all this added revenue comes from. That's what
the Fox is say.
Speaker 1 (16:51):
Be sure to catch live editions of the Doug Gottlieb
Show weekdays at three pm Eastern noon Pacific on Fox
Sports Radio and the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 2 (17:01):
Let's find out who what's annoying Jason Stewart.
Speaker 1 (17:05):
And now it's your annoying.
Speaker 5 (17:12):
He Doug. I always want to stay on message, right
and my message is, I guess my cause. My cause
is to get predictions out of the sports talk content space.
And I want to give you the listeners a tangible example.
So last night's game started a six and a half
(17:35):
point Cowboys dog Michah Parsons has traded it goes up
to eight and a half. The money was going on
the Eagles. That's why the points kept getting bigger for
the Cowboys. Colin cow heard every day said he doesn't
see how this isn't going to be a runaway. And
(18:01):
I want to use your message on our group text
as an example. You said this morning, I was wrong
on the game last night, and then you had a
couple of things to say about the game, and you said,
but then again, Jalen Carter wasn't there for the Eagles,
And therein wise single proof of why we should not
(18:22):
do predictions. Could anyone have seen the Eagles best defender
spitting at the other quarterback and being ejected for the game.
At that point, the point spread of eight and a
half looked pretty damn good. But nobody predicted that. It's
just so hilarious that people could speak with conviction when
(18:45):
they try to predict these games. It's utter nonsense and
bullshit and empty calories. And the Jalen Carter thing is
the perfect example of why it's empty calories, because nobody
could predict a thing like that.
Speaker 2 (19:00):
Yeah, I mean, but for whatever reason, people love that stuff.
And I don't think it's I don't think it's bad
to do some sort of what do you think is
gonna happen? I think when you get to scores, here's what.
I turned off the TV last night and I just
(19:20):
thought to myself, damn it, NFL, damn it. I forget
the number of how many games are within a touchdown,
but it's basically almost all of them. So when you
see that eight and a half points spread, you're trained
as anybody who I don't study gambling. I'm not a gambler,
but I it's like I associate with enough people, we
(19:42):
have them on to not to listen to them pretty much.
Every NFL game is gonna end up within a touchdown,
and last night was a perfect example. And then you
can go back and go like, well, there's this one
play here, one play there, and I think we would
all again on paper, I would. I kind of agree
with Colin. I didn't think it would be terribly competitive,
but the Cowboys played well. Look like they still have
some plays out in the field. Yeah, you couldn't. You
(20:06):
couldn't obviously predict Jalen Carter getting thrown out. But I
think but eliminating predictions from sports radio, it's hard to do.
Speaker 5 (20:18):
Well. Your first point is talking about what you think
might happen. Yeah, that's that's an analysis based on data,
predicting the actual score and the result is the bullshit.
That's that's my point. Yeah, you could do a bunch
of previewing a game. You know, when I say preview
this game, I'm not saying pick a winner. I don't
(20:39):
want to hear your winner. I don't think listeners do.
But anyways, Angel Reese is lucky that the NFL started
this week. Angel Reese gave us amazing and amazing gift
this week that has been completely whitewashed by the NFL.
So this happened on Wednesday. H Angel Reese did an
(21:01):
interview with Front Off of Sports with by all accounts,
a very reputable reporter. Within that interview on Front Off
of Sports, she was pissed off. I'm sick of dealing
with this shit, she says. We need good players, we
need great players. If I have to, I will, I
(21:22):
will help and recruit great players. She went on to
say another couple of things that were pretty inflammatory toward
her team. So I guess her coach and players were
pissed off, like you're throwing us under the bus. We're
not good enough for you, So she she I guess. Supposedly,
she says, apologized to them in the locker room and
(21:44):
then went out and had a press conference and said this,
Are you frustrated.
Speaker 9 (21:49):
With the organization or frustrated in general?
Speaker 8 (21:55):
I don't think I'm frustrated. I probably am frustrated myself
right now. I think the language is taken out of context.
And I really didn't intentionally mean to put down my
teammates because they've been through this with me throughout.
Speaker 3 (22:07):
The whole year.
Speaker 8 (22:08):
They've busted their eyes just how I busted my eyes.
They showed up for me through thick and thin, and
in the locker room when nobody could see anything. So
I would apologize to my teammates, which I already have,
about the article and how it was misconstrued, about what
was said. And I just have to be better with
my language because I know it's not the message, just
the messenger, and understanding what I say can be taken
(22:30):
any kind of way. So I just have to really
be better and grow from this.
Speaker 5 (22:33):
Doug, have you ever heard a worst attempt in an apology?
This is this being framed somehow like she's being accountable.
She said that her language was taken out of context,
that her words get misconstrued because oftentimes it's the messenger,
not the message. In other words, reporters are going out
(22:54):
of their way to make sure they make her look
bad in every quote, and they change words around because
everyone hates Angel Reeves. So we need to misconstrue what
she said.
Speaker 2 (23:08):
I don't think she understands the the out of context.
I think that's that's really what's kind of at work here. Again,
pretty well aware that's what's at work here. She just
throws out out of context because it's she doesn't know
what she's saying, right, I mean, does does anybody think
(23:30):
that she knows? She clearly doesn't know what something being
taken out of context is like. If anything, she what
she said doesn't fit into the context of what she meant.
But again, that's not a no one else is taken
out of context. We're taking it at what she said, right.
(23:51):
I mean, she said we need better players, we're not
good enough, you know. And she didn't say I need
to be better or you know, I'm just not you know,
I'm not at that level. She's like everybody else. So
that's the opposite of accountability. She might not be wrong,
by the way, but again, please don't tell us he
took an out of context.
Speaker 5 (24:12):
The Caleb Williams conversation, I think is fascinating. I like
all the Caleb Williams content. I'm interested to see how
he performs this year. If Aaron Rodgers is my most
intriguing story this year, Caleb Williams is a close second.
I think it's Dan Byer's most intriguing. So a'mon what's
(24:33):
his name? I'm on Saint Brown, the Lions receiver has
a podcast with his brother, and they had what's his name?
Rome or Roma Dunze Roma Donza. So you have a
Lion's receiver has a Bears receiver on another generation might
look down at that, like why would you fraternize with
(24:55):
your enemy on podcasts? Why would you be seeing you
like what the optics don't look great? But anyways, that's
not my way I thinks is annoying. This is what
This is the exchange that they have.
Speaker 10 (25:06):
Bro, I'll be on Twitter like I feel like they
be on his dick twenty four seven. He can't do
shit right, Like, no.
Speaker 6 (25:11):
Matter what he does, good or bad, it's all on
Twitter like they I saw he can't breathe, Like there's
one dude in the NFL's him, Like no, he takes
one step wrong.
Speaker 10 (25:20):
It's like, oh Caleb did this this this Like Bro,
they can't just let him be.
Speaker 5 (25:24):
I feel bashon tied man.
Speaker 6 (25:25):
I'd be like, bro, nah, they did right for sure.
Speaker 8 (25:28):
I'm not gonna lie.
Speaker 6 (25:29):
It's crazy because like you see like other players and
like we watched the film and shit, and you know,
like who's out here like out here really bullshitting you
know what I mean? But like when it comes to
Sea Will, I don't know what it was that media
asked me like the same thing today and I was like,
I don't know, y'all tell me.
Speaker 5 (25:43):
So here's the deal. And these are players, I think
they can't see the forest beyond the trees. Their players
are taking it for each other. I get it. But
I think a lot of the people that cover the
NFL kind of following the same category that I do.
We remember that Caleb Williams has fought and his team
try to leverage their entire career, his entire career based
(26:06):
on him being a special talent. Nobody has ever seen
a Caleb Williams. So when we're drafted by the team
that we want to draft him, and we're going to
try our best to have the Vikings draft him or
trade for him as according to this book that's coming out,
And also when that team drafts him, we're going to
ask for ownership stake. This. He was made out to
(26:30):
be like the next coming, the thing that was going
to change the way the business was done. And I
think a lot of people that cover the sport remember that,
and we see him through that prism. So the shit
that he gets I think is coming from that place.
Speaker 2 (26:47):
I think there's some of that. I also think there's
some of the sideline reactions in his yet sc there's
the painted fingernails, there's that he was the number one pick,
and then there's just the massive overreaction to things you
reach on social media and you take it as that's
all the media, when it's not. Most people on social
media questioning somebody is not media. It's randos and it's
(27:11):
hard to differentiate, especially when you're constantly on your phone,
like why are you taking opinions off of Twitter on
an NFL quarterback? That doesn't matter. If the guy's really good,
he's really good, and everybody will eventually figure out that
he's really good. But I think it's more about social media.
And the other part is they're actually using writers and
(27:33):
de writing in the wrong context. They're not de writing him.
If they were, they would be saying how grad he is,
that's what writing is, or glazing, as I've learned from
my son.
Speaker 5 (27:44):
It also opens another conversation about context and words and
how phrases migrate. You know, we've had a back and
forth a long time now about the usage of the
word pause. It started out as something and maybe it's
migrated to something else. I always thought, if you said
(28:05):
if I said Sam's beIN on my dick since I
got here, I would think that's that's telling people that
he constantly sucks my dick metaphorically, he's constantly complimenting me
and being a brown noser.
Speaker 9 (28:19):
Yeah, yeah, I thought that too, But why do you
have to use me? Well, this is an example. So
you're and you're making eye contact on me right now.
So play the first five seconds of I'm On's Ross,
I'm brom Bro.
Speaker 10 (28:30):
I'll be on Twitter like I feel like they'd be
on his dick twenty four.
Speaker 5 (28:34):
Yeah, I don't get that. So has that has that
phrase migrated?
Speaker 9 (28:40):
That sounds like they're everyone's kissing his ass. Yes, that
is the more vulgar version of kissing ass.
Speaker 2 (28:45):
That's a kissing your ass.
Speaker 9 (28:46):
But he's saying in a way that's like everyone's been
on a case.
Speaker 2 (28:50):
Yes, but that's not how No, it is not migrated
that way. That's not that I'm aware of.
Speaker 5 (28:56):
He's using it, and the like the.
Speaker 2 (28:58):
Opposite, the opposite, Yes, the opposite. That's what I'm saying
about riding.
Speaker 9 (29:02):
I don't either like if someone's like riding on your back,
I don't like on your case.
Speaker 5 (29:06):
That's a negative, but riding.
Speaker 2 (29:08):
Either of us. Who is this podcast?
Speaker 5 (29:10):
By the way, I'm on Rossa and Brown and his brother.
Speaker 2 (29:15):
Mm hm, those guys are both modern day guys, weren't they.
Speaker 9 (29:21):
That sounds familiar pretty sure, isn't there dad like a
famous Olympian? Or could be wrong the Saint Brown family.
Speaker 2 (29:29):
Yeah sure, I don't know. All I know is that's it.
I I don't even know how we picked that up.
That's what's that's that's how deep that pickup was. But
it also plays into the everybody has everybody has a podcast?
I think you know.
Speaker 9 (29:45):
Oh, by the way, John Brown was a bodybuilder in
two time amateur Mister Universe, So that's what.
Speaker 5 (29:50):
Yeah. Anaheim Hills, California, that's right next to Briah.
Speaker 2 (29:56):
Sure, esper Runza High School would probably be there or
Canyon their feeder.
Speaker 5 (30:00):
He could have gone to Canyon, but he probably or Esperanza.
I have a bonus one today because it impacts somebody
in our industry and it's somebody that you have a
past with. In other words, on Twitter once.
Speaker 2 (30:14):
With oh.
Speaker 5 (30:16):
Emmanuel Acho. He's an interesting one. He launched, he launched
his own thing. Now he's independent. He's doing something called
the speakeasy, which is a play on words, you know,
like you could speak easy. This is a safe space
to speak easy. And the set is like a bar.
That's a speakeasy. Very very clever. Anyways, he's doing his
(30:40):
own thing now because he was fired. He was fired
from pok Sports and uh this is how he, I
guess characterized the firing to Cam Newton this week.
Speaker 10 (30:52):
I got cut five times by the age of twenty five.
I know how to see around a corner. There came
a point in time where I'm like, hey, we launched
a new show at a new time slot, with a
new cast and a new name. It was like, and mind,
you are timeslots going up against first Take. Shout out
to you, Cam and steven A and WHI y'all got
going to first take? It's the ninety eight Bulls versusn
(31:14):
expansion team. What do you think was gonna happen? If
you only have nine, ten eleven months, I wouldn't take
you down. Michael jordan'sc Gotti Pippen.
Speaker 5 (31:22):
I think it's great. I really do think it's great
that and I'm not going to fault him for this.
I think big ego people never actually see the true reason,
which is the show wasn't very good, Your content wasn't
very good, Your your actual information and opinions did not
entice people to watch. But instead of instead of accepting that,
(31:47):
he listed at least five reasons why his show was canceled.
Let's count him going up against first. Take sure, new show,
new name, name, new concept. Of course, it wasn't gonna
work in nine months, Doug.
Speaker 2 (32:06):
You live long enough, you coach long enough, you're gonna
get fired. You work long enough in our business, you're
gonna get your show's gonna get canceled. Right eventually, eventually, everybody,
although I have seen I don't know if you saw
the serious X. I'm still trying to negotiate with Howard.
If you saw that anyway, Yeah, look I could. I
(32:30):
don't believe in kicking somebody while they're down. I don't
one because I've definitely been there, you know, definitely been there,
And networks don't always make moves that make sense, and
sometimes they do, like I don't know, I don't really understand.
I never liked Around the Around the Horn. I didn't
(32:51):
think it was a great show, but it just became
such a constant. It was always on, and it was
pretty quick moving, and some of the characters had remained
for the entirety of the show that it didn't bother me, Right,
what was Lebotard show? That his dad in it.
Speaker 5 (33:10):
And forgot what was that called?
Speaker 2 (33:12):
Yeah, And that was one of those ways you don't
get the show. It lasted a long time despite the
fact that I didn't really understand this. I didn't understand
a lot of the premise of the show. But people
who love the show freaking love the show. Odd shows
deal is really interesting, right. He was kind of a
Johnny come Lately to the to the sports talkie game
(33:33):
he had. He and his brother had NFL careers. His
was very shortened and during I mean, he was really
a product of the pandemic more than maybe anybody, right,
because he had a book that was, I guess a
bestseller and he made an Oprah appearance, and I mean,
here's a here's a term. Are you've familiar with clout chasing?
Speaker 5 (33:57):
Yeah, okay, so I.
Speaker 2 (34:00):
Felt like Fox at the time was clout chasing, Like,
oh my gosh, here's a popular, young, outspoken black man.
Let's go get him. And he's well spoken, right, but
he just didn't have. He wasn't placed with guys with
enough experience to kind of maneuver around some of his takes, which,
(34:21):
while strong, were you know, laughably off. But again it
doesn't matter, like my thing would be if I were
if I were him, if I was advising Acho, and
I'm obviously not, we're not friends. I think I met
him once, he was at a party. It wasn't long ago.
He was was a couple weeks ago and I was
(34:41):
in LA. I saw him at a party for like
thirty seconds, and I shock his hand, like I don't
have problems with people when they have problems, like I
don't care enough. But if I was advising him, I'd
be like, dude, keep to the grindstone, get on one
of the other networks. If that's the role, like as
a taker, hot taker, then live up that role. And
now he's I guess, funding his own thing, which is
(35:04):
brave and a great way to burn through a ton
of money. But I would probably say that he hopefully
has some corporate sponsors where he's at minimum breaking even early,
and he probably can make eventually more money than he
was making at Fox. Maybe if it hits, but it's
definitely a gamble, and it's a gamble on yourself. But yeah,
(35:24):
I mean, there's no reason to make excuses there, and.
Speaker 5 (35:27):
I do think too. I mean, the reason I didn't
mention it, Doug, is because, as you know, I don't
like to get into the muck. I don't like to
get into gossip. I'm not the audience for salaciousness, so
I would never bring some I'm above bringing this up.
But but there was the whole I put my network
(35:48):
in a very unflattering position because in the wake of
the Skip Bayless Joy Taylor lawsuit, it was revealed that
I was sleeping with Joy Taylor and that I had
a lot to do with getting her onto my daily
show because we slept together reportedly, and she was reportedly
(36:10):
sleeping with the boss reportedly. I didn't want to bring
that up, Doug, because frankly, I'm above that. But he
also didn't mention that in his list of excuses.
Speaker 2 (36:19):
Yes, yeah, why didn't you mention that, you know? And
there was also the I think most of us thought,
who are in the industry and definitely have worked at Fox,
that that show was a kind of a mush together
of a bunch of people whose contracts would expire, which
meant that it was sort of a nothing show, but
(36:40):
they didn't want to get nothing out of it. Which
it's a weird way of doing business, but I have
seen that business being done several times. Over Look. I
can tell you that ESPN has demoted people and re
upped them, Like, well, if he demotes somebody, don't love them,
why would you re up them and even give them
more money? That doesn't make any sense. So it's a
really hard industry. I refuse to gick anybody when they're down.
(37:01):
I do think that he's still in denial. But you
know there's look, there's there's steps to to healing, right,
so the five steps and you know at some point
he'll get to acceptance. But he's not there yet.
Speaker 5 (37:14):
Okay, So the Caleb Williams conversation Acho Angel Reese agent predictions.
Speaker 2 (37:20):
Angel Rees Angel Rees, you know, blatantly throwing her teammates
under the bus while then misusing the idea that something
could be taken out of context? Is any Why are.
Speaker 1 (37:35):
We doing this.
Speaker 5 (37:39):
Because we can now, Doug, I've never done this, but
I can imagine how frustrated it would be. I have
never been drinking beers and then all of a sudden,
someone tells me, you're drinking a non alcoholic beer. I
would be infuriated. So Jason Kelsey had an experience with
(38:01):
his brother Travis and his brother's fiance Taylor Swift, and
it went down like this.
Speaker 4 (38:07):
I find out that I've been drinking non alcoholic beer
the entire game.
Speaker 2 (38:15):
It is the most amunt of shame I've ever felt myself. Really, yeah,
I was just like, the fuck is wrong with you? Jason?
Speaker 5 (38:22):
Who was the person that captain head?
Speaker 2 (38:24):
Just so you know Taylor.
Speaker 4 (38:27):
Because she said Travis had just been doing the same day.
Speaker 2 (38:31):
Awesome. Well I can play for you. I mean, it's funny.
Well I can play for you because we can't. That's
it for the end the Bonus Podcast. I got the
radio show every day three to five. He's from to Pacific,
Fox Sports Tradio, I Heart Radio. I am Doug Gottlieb
All right, right, this is the Doug Gottlieb Show. Heres
in the Bonus with Doug gottli.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
What Up, Doug gott Leap Show, Fox Sports Radio, iHeartRadio.
How you doing. So? Pablo Tori has done it again.
This was about a month and a half ago, maybe
two months ago. He exposed this, these allegations of collusion
(00:31):
between the NFL and the NFLPA. And it's interesting because
out of that investigation, if you read all that stuff,
you're like, yeah, it feels close, but not really that close,
and nothing happened to anybody in the NFL. On the
other hand, the NFLPA, you had mass resignations. Now I
don't know if it's from that, people complaining about the
(00:51):
the collective bard and agreement what it is. There's some
corruption as well, all those things. But Pablo Torri is
now he's gone on his own, He has his own
sh and he does some of this investigative journalism. And
the newest one was uncovering some now defunct media business,
digital business or whatever that allegedly paid Kawhi lettered like
(01:16):
twenty eight million dollars in a year for not doing anything,
or twenty million dollars total for not was like seven
million years, four years for not doing anything. And the
the assumption and the accusations are that this was like
under the tables, sweet sweetening of the deal in order
to get Kawhi letter to come to the Clippers from
(01:37):
the Raptors. Bomber went on ESPN today and denied all
of it and has actually encouraged them to investigate to
make sure he didn't do anything wrong. So there's a
bunch of things to it. One, Pabulatory is very very bright.
I don't think there's any argument it. It's not because
he went to Harvard. I know, guys we went to
Harvard that are still pretty bright, but not exceedingly bright.
(01:59):
He might be at too smart for sports. I've always
thought that, but in this realm, obviously that's where he
can excel in that kind of investigative journalism sort of thing.
And then he had Mark Cuban on earlier today as well.
Cuban and him went back and forth on social media.
So I don't know, I do know. I don't think
(02:22):
this is a complete nothing burger, but mostly a nothing burger.
On the other hand, with you know, sixty minutes so
to being in shambles, and East sixty going away. The
world does need somebody to check the checks and balances,
and if that's where his podcast goes, I think it
could be rewarding. The issue becomes that here's how it
(02:44):
feels to me. It feels a lot like a certain
portion of our of the demographic who votes who always
assumes that there's something nefarious at work. And that's both sides.
That there can't just be the story. There has to
be something behind the story. And even when you're presented
(03:06):
with data, with facts, with you know, with subpoenas, with
sword testimony, and it shows that your assumptions were in
fact false, there's either there's no my bad or the
my bads are completely overwhelmed by the initial accusations of
the story. And I think that's wrong. This one, to me,
(03:27):
does it smell a little funny? It does? Does it?
Is it explainable? It is? Do I believe it as
of now?
Speaker 3 (03:33):
I do?
Speaker 2 (03:36):
But if there's a podcast or with him and Balmer,
if there's a day in court and he is, he
comes off of his horse and says, you know what,
I was wrong about this thing. I made some assumptions
based upon what I saw in these documents. But again,
like what you're saying actually makes sense, It doesn't help
with anybody, you know, it doesn't help within it because
(03:59):
people are convinced that everything's bad, everyone's on the take,
everything's fake, nothing's actually real, and all scientific data doesn't
make it, isn't, isn't worthy of being called scientific data.
That's where we are as society. So I guess what
I'm saying is I appreciate what Pablo's doing. I respect it,
but I don't think it it's gonna land where it
(04:20):
should land with the common sports public. The common sports
public is going to look at these two stories and go, like,
see everybody's out against anybody else, on students making money,
gender issues, whatever, It just becomes kind of nationwide sports
wide victim.
Speaker 1 (04:36):
Be sure to catch live editions of The Doug Gottlieb
Show weekdays at three pm Eastern noon Pacific on Fox
Sports Radio and the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 2 (04:49):
Let's get to what the Foxes and Now every day
at this time Doug Gotlieb Show. In the one is
podcast played for your portion of previous show Fox Sports Radio,
Fox Sports One. Here's Brady Quinn talking about the spitting
incident last night before the game.
Speaker 4 (05:05):
I already heard conversation about, well, Jalen Carter spit on
Dak Prescott. Dak Prescott spit towards Jalen Carter on the ground.
There's a difference, which I one hundred percent agree with that.
But I would say once the video came out from
(05:25):
Dak spitting towards Jalen Carter on the ground, that's how
That's how like fights start where it escalates, right, and
then you get someone who comes back and retaliates. They
they won up it like a little bit more. And
typically if you get spin on what are you gonna do?
Speaker 5 (05:41):
Knock the dude out? No, you knock the dude out?
Speaker 4 (05:44):
Yeah, that's yeah, something crazy, something crazy. So that's where
I kind of look at it and say it to
me watching the game, I understand that it qualifies for
being disqualified for what Jalen Carter did before we've even
played a damn play of the entire season. We can't
just give the guy a penalty for you know, fifteen
(06:05):
yard penalty and warn him and make sure we know
the entire story, because in this shows like, all right,
that was a really stupid move by Jayleen Carter. Probably
still is to some degree. But now I'm like, all right,
I don't know what Dak said. It looked like he
you know, motivated him a little bit to walk over
and then who knows what was said between the two
before that. And I'm not saying it's ever cool or
(06:26):
okay if you lose your cool like that, but I
don't know.
Speaker 2 (06:30):
It looked like Dak was, I.
Speaker 4 (06:32):
Don't know, maybe drawing him into it.
Speaker 6 (06:36):
Hmm.
Speaker 2 (06:40):
I actually agree with Brady hear, I do. But they
always catch the second guy, right, And I think that
Dak while he's like, I spit all the time, you know,
and I spit like whatever, when you see it, you're like,
it kind of did look like he sort of did
the spit at him, and like Jalen Carter's like, I
but whatever, they caught the second guy. You got to
know better. And let's also like we're only focusing on
(07:03):
the spitting thing. Remember the play, the Cowboys are huddling,
the Eagles are behind the football on defense getting ready
for the first play, right, and he's the one standing
by the Cowboys huddle. So before we like absolve Jalen
Carter because he may have overreacted to Dak Prescott spitting
in his general direction. Go into your huddle, get the
(07:25):
frick out of the Cowboys huddle. This is uh Nick
Wright talking about the Red Zone channel, and it.
Speaker 7 (07:33):
Is time we all start watching the NFL like adults.
So here is the misinformation. There are gonna be a
few commercials on red Zone this year. People are blaming ESPN. Listen,
I'm not above taking shots of the competition. This ain't
on them though they haven't. They don't own it yet,
they haven't taken it over yet. And by the way,
(07:55):
if you were paying attention to Red Zone last year,
they already did this. There are commercials on red Zone
a couple of weekends last year. Are we gonna miss
any of the game. No, there's gonna go split screen
four times for fifteen seconds each and show you a
Burger King ad while you're watching the game. Split screen.
Speaker 1 (08:12):
That's it.
Speaker 7 (08:13):
That's all that's gonna happen. And honestly, we've been spoiled
by having Red Zone as we've had it the last
twenty years anyway, So everyone stopped whinding. But that's not
really the take. The take is this, and this is controversial.
This night put in my bones everyone knows.
Speaker 3 (08:27):
I'm that.
Speaker 7 (08:29):
You cannot be a self respecting, die hard NFL fan
if the only way you consume football is through red zone.
Watch a whole game like an adult second screen supplementary
on your computer. Fine, but don't tell me you love
the NBA, Like, what game do you watch last night? Now,
(08:49):
it's just bleed to report speeds, all some highlights. You
don't learn anything. You don't know anything, and sports media
you can't cover the league if you're just watching red zones.
We got to learn, coach, how a team matriculated the
ball down the field, not just the candy of the
touchdowns and the turnovers and the font returns. So if
you are a true football fan, throw on a full game,
(09:13):
have red zone secondary, whether it's on your phone, computer screen,
if you have multi TV setup, that's fine. And if
you're just a casual fan just following fantasy, no problem.
But don't try to get in football arguments or football
discussions if you haven't seen a team run a second
and thirteen from their own twenty yard line in thirty years.
Speaker 2 (09:35):
Jay stun I had a great conversation about this because
because we both believe that we both believe that the
whole red zone thing got started because of fantasy football.
As a matter of fact, at the end of every
red zone Sunday they show every touchdown. Why because touchdowns,
(09:57):
above all else are how you win fantasy football. So
I like, I kind of think that I don't kind
of think. I do think that while Nick is super
clever with his words and making fun of people like myself,
that you can consume a lot more football that way,
but especially all of these fantasy football owners and telling
(10:20):
them they need to be adults. Like that type of condescension.
Is it tracks? Okay, I've been guilty of it on
some level myself, but it's also you're like thumbing your
nose at the lifeblood of the NFL. The lifeblood of
the NFL. Listen, if they really want to make money
on the red zone, they need to continue to do
(10:41):
the exact same thing, only start to factor in betting odds,
like that's where you do fantasy and betting odds. Now
you're killing it. As for the ads, I understand that
there's a small amount of ads fifteen second ads here there,
there are sometimes NYCREB. The problem with it is the
(11:02):
entire sale of red zone is commercial free, commercial free,
and you can say ESPN can say, hey, we ain't
got nothing to do with it. The reality is that
all of these things can be mandated when it's put
onto a contract. If ESPN didn't want commercials on red Zone,
(11:25):
you know what, they could have said, we will not
do this deal combining with the NFL network if there
are commercials with red Zone. So I think that part
is bullshit.
Speaker 8 (11:38):
Just do.
Speaker 2 (11:39):
And I love the red Zone and I'm glad that it's,
you know, gonna be part of this new package. And
I know you can sneak in commercials. And the problem
with sneaking in commercials is not hey we can avoid games,
we can sneak them in here or there. It's once
you open Pandora's box and you start making money, and commercials,
well you can make now you can do whatever you want.
You're like, well, we already had commercials. We just expand I.
Speaker 5 (12:01):
Think that there's a there's a conversation here of considering
the source, right. I think Nick writes vantage point needs
to be considered. He works in sports, and by all accounts,
I've worked with people that work directly with him. I
know his reputation like no one works harder in our
(12:23):
industry than Nick Wright, and that's a huge compliment. I
respect the work even that take right there, that angle
on this is something we you just don't hear. He
found a new angle of a story this week and
he and he said something funny about it. The problem
is is that it's very egocentric. It's like he's coming
at it from a place of like, I talk sports
(12:44):
for a living, so I need to watch every game,
so you should do the same because you want to
be a man. Ninety nine point nine to nine percent
of people don't talk sports for a living. That's the problem.
Ninety nine point nine to nine percent of the people
have other things to do in their lives. They have families,
they have commitments, they have jobs, and they just they
(13:07):
only have a certain amount of bandwidth on a Sunday
to consume sports, and this is how they do it.
So Nick Wright's take is I think is is good.
It's just very ego centric. He can't see the forest
beyond the trees on this. The red zone meets a
purpose for both fantasy and gambling, I think, and I
(13:27):
think that's why it's so popular. So that's the issue
I have with neck, but I do. I do enjoy
his takes. I do.
Speaker 2 (13:34):
I do as well, not all of them, I mean,
don't agree with them all, but you can still enjoy.
I enjoy some takes that I don't I vehemently disagree with,
because I do think they're well thought out. I do
think most of them are well thought out. Here's Dan
Patrick talking about the Chargers Chiefs game tonight in Brazil.
Speaker 3 (13:50):
You have the Chiefs and the Chargers in Brazil. Now
here's the problem I have with this. I know, I
know we're getting to you know, global expansion here, but
the fact that the Chargers in Chiefs, a divisional rivalry
game is going to be played in Brazil is malpractice.
I mean, that's terrible because that should be played in
(14:12):
Los Angeles, or if it was going to be played
in Kansas City. This is a divisional game, and I
don't think the fans in Brazil were going to go, hey,
we better get an opening game, we better get a
Week one game. I'm not anti international. What I am
anti is a divisional game we're going to export and.
Speaker 2 (14:32):
It's Week one.
Speaker 3 (14:34):
You can't do that to the Chiefs and they charge
your fans this Week seven and then you have a
bye week. If you want to do it that way,
then I think it's fair to all involved. You can
still have games there, but let's not have opening day
or their first week, their first game a divisional game,
and you're going to play it in Brazil.
Speaker 2 (14:56):
There's another side to it. So the first thing is
you have seventeen games, so you have an unbalanced schedule
home versus road. So you're not actually losing a home
game per se. Right, So we're pretty clear on that.
Speaker 5 (15:09):
What was that? Explain that again?
Speaker 2 (15:11):
How many games do we play in an NFL season?
Speaker 5 (15:14):
Seventeen?
Speaker 2 (15:15):
Right, so you have an you haven't imbalance in your schedule, right,
You're not gonna have the same number of home as
road correct.
Speaker 5 (15:23):
No, but this point is that it's a home game
against a division opponent.
Speaker 2 (15:26):
I get it. I understand, okay, but you know I don't.
I wouldn't like it either if forget about Charger fans.
If I was the Chargers, you know, you lose, and
I guess you could say you lose home field advantage.
The only thing is, like I've been to that game
at so far, it's not really a Charger home game, right,
And you know again, this is the give back to
(15:47):
the league. This is the kickback to the league. And
where you say, like, well, where's the bonus in it,
where's the benefit in it? Well, the league last year
made what four hundred and like thirty million dollars for
each team? Is that right? Is that the number that
we found from the packers. Where do you think that
money comes from? That's where it comes from. So do
(16:09):
the fans get screwed?
Speaker 8 (16:11):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (16:11):
Yeah, But the other way looking at is they have one, two, three, four, five, six,
seven eight. Yeah, so they have eight other home games.
They have the same number of home games they would
have had they lose the Chiefs game as they did.
It sucks, like that's the downside to all these international
games is you're losing a game, and sometimes you're losing
a really good one. This is one of them. The
(16:35):
upside to it is that you don't have to You're
not gonna do it every year. Chiefs are going to
do it more often than you are because they're a
more popular team and because you guys are doing it.
That's where all this added revenue comes from. That's what
the Fox is say.
Speaker 1 (16:51):
Be sure to catch live editions of the Doug Gottlieb
Show weekdays at three pm Eastern noon Pacific on Fox
Sports Radio and the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 2 (17:01):
Let's find out who what's annoying Jason Stewart.
Speaker 1 (17:05):
And now it's your annoying.
Speaker 5 (17:12):
He Doug. I always want to stay on message, right
and my message is, I guess my cause. My cause
is to get predictions out of the sports talk content space.
And I want to give you the listeners a tangible example.
So last night's game started a six and a half
(17:35):
point Cowboys dog Michah Parsons has traded it goes up
to eight and a half. The money was going on
the Eagles. That's why the points kept getting bigger for
the Cowboys. Colin cow heard every day said he doesn't
see how this isn't going to be a runaway. And
(18:01):
I want to use your message on our group text
as an example. You said this morning, I was wrong
on the game last night, and then you had a
couple of things to say about the game, and you said,
but then again, Jalen Carter wasn't there for the Eagles,
And therein wise single proof of why we should not
(18:22):
do predictions. Could anyone have seen the Eagles best defender
spitting at the other quarterback and being ejected for the game.
At that point, the point spread of eight and a
half looked pretty damn good. But nobody predicted that. It's
just so hilarious that people could speak with conviction when
(18:45):
they try to predict these games. It's utter nonsense and
bullshit and empty calories. And the Jalen Carter thing is
the perfect example of why it's empty calories, because nobody
could predict a thing like that.
Speaker 2 (19:00):
Yeah, I mean, but for whatever reason, people love that stuff.
And I don't think it's I don't think it's bad
to do some sort of what do you think is
gonna happen? I think when you get to scores, here's what.
I turned off the TV last night and I just
(19:20):
thought to myself, damn it, NFL, damn it. I forget
the number of how many games are within a touchdown,
but it's basically almost all of them. So when you
see that eight and a half points spread, you're trained
as anybody who I don't study gambling. I'm not a gambler,
but I it's like I associate with enough people, we
(19:42):
have them on to not to listen to them pretty much.
Every NFL game is gonna end up within a touchdown,
and last night was a perfect example. And then you
can go back and go like, well, there's this one
play here, one play there, and I think we would
all again on paper, I would. I kind of agree
with Colin. I didn't think it would be terribly competitive,
but the Cowboys played well. Look like they still have
some plays out in the field. Yeah, you couldn't. You
(20:06):
couldn't obviously predict Jalen Carter getting thrown out. But I
think but eliminating predictions from sports radio, it's hard to do.
Speaker 5 (20:18):
Well. Your first point is talking about what you think
might happen. Yeah, that's that's an analysis based on data,
predicting the actual score and the result is the bullshit.
That's that's my point. Yeah, you could do a bunch
of previewing a game. You know, when I say preview
this game, I'm not saying pick a winner. I don't
(20:39):
want to hear your winner. I don't think listeners do.
But anyways, Angel Reese is lucky that the NFL started
this week. Angel Reese gave us amazing and amazing gift
this week that has been completely whitewashed by the NFL.
So this happened on Wednesday. H Angel Reese did an
(21:01):
interview with Front Off of Sports with by all accounts,
a very reputable reporter. Within that interview on Front Off
of Sports, she was pissed off. I'm sick of dealing
with this shit, she says. We need good players, we
need great players. If I have to, I will, I
(21:22):
will help and recruit great players. She went on to
say another couple of things that were pretty inflammatory toward
her team. So I guess her coach and players were
pissed off, like you're throwing us under the bus. We're
not good enough for you, So she she I guess. Supposedly,
she says, apologized to them in the locker room and
(21:44):
then went out and had a press conference and said this,
Are you frustrated.
Speaker 9 (21:49):
With the organization or frustrated in general?
Speaker 8 (21:55):
I don't think I'm frustrated. I probably am frustrated myself
right now. I think the language is taken out of context.
And I really didn't intentionally mean to put down my
teammates because they've been through this with me throughout.
Speaker 3 (22:07):
The whole year.
Speaker 8 (22:08):
They've busted their eyes just how I busted my eyes.
They showed up for me through thick and thin, and
in the locker room when nobody could see anything. So
I would apologize to my teammates, which I already have,
about the article and how it was misconstrued, about what
was said. And I just have to be better with
my language because I know it's not the message, just
the messenger, and understanding what I say can be taken
(22:30):
any kind of way. So I just have to really
be better and grow from this.
Speaker 5 (22:33):
Doug, have you ever heard a worst attempt in an apology?
This is this being framed somehow like she's being accountable.
She said that her language was taken out of context,
that her words get misconstrued because oftentimes it's the messenger,
not the message. In other words, reporters are going out
(22:54):
of their way to make sure they make her look
bad in every quote, and they change words around because
everyone hates Angel Reeves. So we need to misconstrue what
she said.
Speaker 2 (23:08):
I don't think she understands the the out of context.
I think that's that's really what's kind of at work here. Again,
pretty well aware that's what's at work here. She just
throws out out of context because it's she doesn't know
what she's saying, right, I mean, does does anybody think
(23:30):
that she knows? She clearly doesn't know what something being
taken out of context is like. If anything, she what
she said doesn't fit into the context of what she meant.
But again, that's not a no one else is taken
out of context. We're taking it at what she said, right.
(23:51):
I mean, she said we need better players, we're not
good enough, you know. And she didn't say I need
to be better or you know, I'm just not you know,
I'm not at that level. She's like everybody else. So
that's the opposite of accountability. She might not be wrong,
by the way, but again, please don't tell us he
took an out of context.
Speaker 5 (24:12):
The Caleb Williams conversation, I think is fascinating. I like
all the Caleb Williams content. I'm interested to see how
he performs this year. If Aaron Rodgers is my most
intriguing story this year, Caleb Williams is a close second.
I think it's Dan Byer's most intriguing. So a'mon what's
(24:33):
his name? I'm on Saint Brown, the Lions receiver has
a podcast with his brother, and they had what's his name?
Rome or Roma Dunze Roma Donza. So you have a
Lion's receiver has a Bears receiver on another generation might
look down at that, like why would you fraternize with
(24:55):
your enemy on podcasts? Why would you be seeing you
like what the optics don't look great? But anyways, that's
not my way I thinks is annoying. This is what
This is the exchange that they have.
Speaker 10 (25:06):
Bro, I'll be on Twitter like I feel like they
be on his dick twenty four seven. He can't do
shit right, Like, no.
Speaker 6 (25:11):
Matter what he does, good or bad, it's all on
Twitter like they I saw he can't breathe, Like there's
one dude in the NFL's him, Like no, he takes
one step wrong.
Speaker 10 (25:20):
It's like, oh Caleb did this this this Like Bro,
they can't just let him be.
Speaker 5 (25:24):
I feel bashon tied man.
Speaker 6 (25:25):
I'd be like, bro, nah, they did right for sure.
Speaker 8 (25:28):
I'm not gonna lie.
Speaker 6 (25:29):
It's crazy because like you see like other players and
like we watched the film and shit, and you know,
like who's out here like out here really bullshitting you
know what I mean? But like when it comes to
Sea Will, I don't know what it was that media
asked me like the same thing today and I was like,
I don't know, y'all tell me.
Speaker 5 (25:43):
So here's the deal. And these are players, I think
they can't see the forest beyond the trees. Their players
are taking it for each other. I get it. But
I think a lot of the people that cover the
NFL kind of following the same category that I do.
We remember that Caleb Williams has fought and his team
try to leverage their entire career, his entire career based
(26:06):
on him being a special talent. Nobody has ever seen
a Caleb Williams. So when we're drafted by the team
that we want to draft him, and we're going to
try our best to have the Vikings draft him or
trade for him as according to this book that's coming out,
And also when that team drafts him, we're going to
ask for ownership stake. This. He was made out to
(26:30):
be like the next coming, the thing that was going
to change the way the business was done. And I
think a lot of people that cover the sport remember that,
and we see him through that prism. So the shit
that he gets I think is coming from that place.
Speaker 2 (26:47):
I think there's some of that. I also think there's
some of the sideline reactions in his yet sc there's
the painted fingernails, there's that he was the number one pick,
and then there's just the massive overreaction to things you
reach on social media and you take it as that's
all the media, when it's not. Most people on social
media questioning somebody is not media. It's randos and it's
(27:11):
hard to differentiate, especially when you're constantly on your phone,
like why are you taking opinions off of Twitter on
an NFL quarterback? That doesn't matter. If the guy's really good,
he's really good, and everybody will eventually figure out that
he's really good. But I think it's more about social media.
And the other part is they're actually using writers and
(27:33):
de writing in the wrong context. They're not de writing him.
If they were, they would be saying how grad he is,
that's what writing is, or glazing, as I've learned from
my son.
Speaker 5 (27:44):
It also opens another conversation about context and words and
how phrases migrate. You know, we've had a back and
forth a long time now about the usage of the
word pause. It started out as something and maybe it's
migrated to something else. I always thought, if you said
(28:05):
if I said Sam's beIN on my dick since I
got here, I would think that's that's telling people that
he constantly sucks my dick metaphorically, he's constantly complimenting me
and being a brown noser.
Speaker 9 (28:19):
Yeah, yeah, I thought that too, But why do you
have to use me? Well, this is an example. So
you're and you're making eye contact on me right now.
So play the first five seconds of I'm On's Ross,
I'm brom Bro.
Speaker 10 (28:30):
I'll be on Twitter like I feel like they'd be
on his dick twenty four.
Speaker 5 (28:34):
Yeah, I don't get that. So has that has that
phrase migrated?
Speaker 9 (28:40):
That sounds like they're everyone's kissing his ass. Yes, that
is the more vulgar version of kissing ass.
Speaker 2 (28:45):
That's a kissing your ass.
Speaker 9 (28:46):
But he's saying in a way that's like everyone's been
on a case.
Speaker 2 (28:50):
Yes, but that's not how No, it is not migrated
that way. That's not that I'm aware of.
Speaker 5 (28:56):
He's using it, and the like the.
Speaker 2 (28:58):
Opposite, the opposite, Yes, the opposite. That's what I'm saying
about riding.
Speaker 9 (29:02):
I don't either like if someone's like riding on your back,
I don't like on your case.
Speaker 5 (29:06):
That's a negative, but riding.
Speaker 2 (29:08):
Either of us. Who is this podcast?
Speaker 5 (29:10):
By the way, I'm on Rossa and Brown and his brother.
Speaker 2 (29:15):
Mm hm, those guys are both modern day guys, weren't they.
Speaker 9 (29:21):
That sounds familiar pretty sure, isn't there dad like a
famous Olympian? Or could be wrong the Saint Brown family.
Speaker 2 (29:29):
Yeah sure, I don't know. All I know is that's it.
I I don't even know how we picked that up.
That's what's that's that's how deep that pickup was. But
it also plays into the everybody has everybody has a podcast?
I think you know.
Speaker 9 (29:45):
Oh, by the way, John Brown was a bodybuilder in
two time amateur Mister Universe, So that's what.
Speaker 5 (29:50):
Yeah. Anaheim Hills, California, that's right next to Briah.
Speaker 2 (29:56):
Sure, esper Runza High School would probably be there or
Canyon their feeder.
Speaker 5 (30:00):
He could have gone to Canyon, but he probably or Esperanza.
I have a bonus one today because it impacts somebody
in our industry and it's somebody that you have a
past with. In other words, on Twitter once.
Speaker 2 (30:14):
With oh.
Speaker 5 (30:16):
Emmanuel Acho. He's an interesting one. He launched, he launched
his own thing. Now he's independent. He's doing something called
the speakeasy, which is a play on words, you know,
like you could speak easy. This is a safe space
to speak easy. And the set is like a bar.
That's a speakeasy. Very very clever. Anyways, he's doing his
(30:40):
own thing now because he was fired. He was fired
from pok Sports and uh this is how he, I
guess characterized the firing to Cam Newton this week.
Speaker 10 (30:52):
I got cut five times by the age of twenty five.
I know how to see around a corner. There came
a point in time where I'm like, hey, we launched
a new show at a new time slot, with a
new cast and a new name. It was like, and mind,
you are timeslots going up against first Take. Shout out
to you, Cam and steven A and WHI y'all got
going to first take? It's the ninety eight Bulls versusn
(31:14):
expansion team. What do you think was gonna happen? If
you only have nine, ten eleven months, I wouldn't take
you down. Michael jordan'sc Gotti Pippen.
Speaker 5 (31:22):
I think it's great. I really do think it's great
that and I'm not going to fault him for this.
I think big ego people never actually see the true reason,
which is the show wasn't very good, Your content wasn't
very good, Your your actual information and opinions did not
entice people to watch. But instead of instead of accepting that,
(31:47):
he listed at least five reasons why his show was canceled.
Let's count him going up against first. Take sure, new show,
new name, name, new concept. Of course, it wasn't gonna
work in nine months, Doug.
Speaker 2 (32:06):
You live long enough, you coach long enough, you're gonna
get fired. You work long enough in our business, you're
gonna get your show's gonna get canceled. Right eventually, eventually, everybody,
although I have seen I don't know if you saw
the serious X. I'm still trying to negotiate with Howard.
If you saw that anyway, Yeah, look I could. I
(32:30):
don't believe in kicking somebody while they're down. I don't
one because I've definitely been there, you know, definitely been there,
And networks don't always make moves that make sense, and
sometimes they do, like I don't know, I don't really understand.
I never liked Around the Around the Horn. I didn't
(32:51):
think it was a great show, but it just became
such a constant. It was always on, and it was
pretty quick moving, and some of the characters had remained
for the entirety of the show that it didn't bother me, Right,
what was Lebotard show? That his dad in it.
Speaker 5 (33:10):
And forgot what was that called?
Speaker 2 (33:12):
Yeah, And that was one of those ways you don't
get the show. It lasted a long time despite the
fact that I didn't really understand this. I didn't understand
a lot of the premise of the show. But people
who love the show freaking love the show. Odd shows
deal is really interesting, right. He was kind of a
Johnny come Lately to the to the sports talkie game
(33:33):
he had. He and his brother had NFL careers. His
was very shortened and during I mean, he was really
a product of the pandemic more than maybe anybody, right,
because he had a book that was, I guess a
bestseller and he made an Oprah appearance, and I mean,
here's a here's a term. Are you've familiar with clout chasing?
Speaker 5 (33:57):
Yeah, okay, so I.
Speaker 2 (34:00):
Felt like Fox at the time was clout chasing, Like,
oh my gosh, here's a popular, young, outspoken black man.
Let's go get him. And he's well spoken, right, but
he just didn't have. He wasn't placed with guys with
enough experience to kind of maneuver around some of his takes, which,
(34:21):
while strong, were you know, laughably off. But again it
doesn't matter, like my thing would be if I were
if I were him, if I was advising Acho, and
I'm obviously not, we're not friends. I think I met
him once, he was at a party. It wasn't long ago.
He was was a couple weeks ago and I was
(34:41):
in LA. I saw him at a party for like
thirty seconds, and I shock his hand, like I don't
have problems with people when they have problems, like I
don't care enough. But if I was advising him, I'd
be like, dude, keep to the grindstone, get on one
of the other networks. If that's the role, like as
a taker, hot taker, then live up that role. And
now he's I guess, funding his own thing, which is
(35:04):
brave and a great way to burn through a ton
of money. But I would probably say that he hopefully
has some corporate sponsors where he's at minimum breaking even early,
and he probably can make eventually more money than he
was making at Fox. Maybe if it hits, but it's
definitely a gamble, and it's a gamble on yourself. But yeah,
(35:24):
I mean, there's no reason to make excuses there, and.
Speaker 5 (35:27):
I do think too. I mean, the reason I didn't
mention it, Doug, is because, as you know, I don't
like to get into the muck. I don't like to
get into gossip. I'm not the audience for salaciousness, so
I would never bring some I'm above bringing this up.
But but there was the whole I put my network
(35:48):
in a very unflattering position because in the wake of
the Skip Bayless Joy Taylor lawsuit, it was revealed that
I was sleeping with Joy Taylor and that I had
a lot to do with getting her onto my daily
show because we slept together reportedly, and she was reportedly
(36:10):
sleeping with the boss reportedly. I didn't want to bring
that up, Doug, because frankly, I'm above that. But he
also didn't mention that in his list of excuses.
Speaker 2 (36:19):
Yes, yeah, why didn't you mention that, you know? And
there was also the I think most of us thought,
who are in the industry and definitely have worked at Fox,
that that show was a kind of a mush together
of a bunch of people whose contracts would expire, which
meant that it was sort of a nothing show, but
(36:40):
they didn't want to get nothing out of it. Which
it's a weird way of doing business, but I have
seen that business being done several times. Over Look. I
can tell you that ESPN has demoted people and re
upped them, Like, well, if he demotes somebody, don't love them,
why would you re up them and even give them
more money? That doesn't make any sense. So it's a
really hard industry. I refuse to gick anybody when they're down.
(37:01):
I do think that he's still in denial. But you
know there's look, there's there's steps to to healing, right,
so the five steps and you know at some point
he'll get to acceptance. But he's not there yet.
Speaker 5 (37:14):
Okay, So the Caleb Williams conversation Acho Angel Reese agent predictions.
Speaker 2 (37:20):
Angel Rees Angel Rees, you know, blatantly throwing her teammates
under the bus while then misusing the idea that something
could be taken out of context? Is any Why are.
Speaker 1 (37:35):
We doing this.
Speaker 5 (37:39):
Because we can now, Doug, I've never done this, but
I can imagine how frustrated it would be. I have
never been drinking beers and then all of a sudden,
someone tells me, you're drinking a non alcoholic beer. I
would be infuriated. So Jason Kelsey had an experience with
(38:01):
his brother Travis and his brother's fiance Taylor Swift, and
it went down like this.
Speaker 4 (38:07):
I find out that I've been drinking non alcoholic beer
the entire game.
Speaker 2 (38:15):
It is the most amunt of shame I've ever felt myself. Really, yeah,
I was just like, the fuck is wrong with you? Jason?
Speaker 5 (38:22):
Who was the person that captain head?
Speaker 2 (38:24):
Just so you know Taylor.
Speaker 4 (38:27):
Because she said Travis had just been doing the same day.
Speaker 2 (38:31):
Awesome. Well I can play for you. I mean, it's funny.
Well I can play for you because we can't. That's
it for the end the Bonus Podcast. I got the
radio show every day three to five. He's from to Pacific,
Fox Sports Tradio, I Heart Radio. I am Doug Gottlieb
Host
Doug Gottlieb
Popular Podcasts
NFL Daily with Gregg Rosenthal
Gregg Rosenthal and a rotating crew of elite NFL Media co-hosts, including Patrick Claybon, Colleen Wolfe, Steve Wyche, Nick Shook and Jourdan Rodrigue of The Athletic get you caught up daily on all the NFL news and analysis you need to be smarter and funnier than your friends.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com