Tony Reali: 0 errors, 0 omissions, but 1 Big Goodbye

Seriously. That is the first time I have heard that. ATH is nothing but a bunch of pompous columnists trying to show how smart they are. PTI is tremendous, and I have been watching since Day 1. In the same manner that SVP/Rusillo isn't the same when one is missing, Wilbon and Kornheiser's chemistry makes that show. They have differing opinions, but they still like each other. I DVR it every day and delete it immediately if Wilbon says anything other than "Welcome to PTI ... Tony?" Once, it was Whitlock AND LeBatard. I almost threw the DVR out into the yard.
And I find Kornheiser hilarious, but not on PTI. The sexual innuendo in the intro always makes me cringe, but his radio show was a must-listen for me for a long time. And one holiday I had to drive to Alabama, and I had the signal for 8 straight hours of the best of his radio show. It was great, and I loved that they talked about more than sports. And I've never laughed out loud so hard at something I've read as his first compilation book of columns. Some hilarious stuff in there.

 

Oy vey.

Whole lot of yelling on this episode from February: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkPQEdahwrA

It's not a "yelling" show.

You may not like the scoring format but I think it's smart in that these "pompous columnists" have to back their opinions -- because they're columnists! -- by making sense of the meat and potatoes and putting it into perspective. That's the beauty of it. These guys are paid to write their opinions only they're showing their penchant for thinking on their feet as well.

How is ATH's "scoring" any different from what some of the posters here do when they shred another poster for opining about this, that, the other without any factual basis?

But the real question is how in tarnations is that ANY different from what Kornheiser and Wilbon do? I find the scoring system a helluva lot more intriguing and believable than some of the little ideas PTI tries, for example, giving their opinion on an event in the form of percentages. Or when they hold a masquerade stick of an athlete's face in front of their own and opine from that athlete's perspective.

I'd like to think I'm pretty good at discerning good TV from bad. I don't think PTI is bad. It's good TV even if the fellas grated on my nerves 6-7 years ago. As I said, Tony and Mike have softened considerably; makes it much easier to tolerate them.

But ATH is the better show. I like competition. I like that you have to bring the goods and score enough points through 3 rounds and then the 1-on-1 for a chance to deliver a tightly spun 30-second "column" to end the show. I love that they constantly change the lineup and feature men and women and writers of all colors and backgrounds.

And Tony is the perfect ringleader because he's easy like Sunday morning and brings his own passion for sports.

I'm baffled that not one other person here likes the show.

 

I watch the last 5 minutes...I only have time for one show and PTI is mine.

 

Tony and Wilbon cut their tv teeth doing DC shows for George Michael. Miss that guy.

 

ATH is not a yelling show in the vein of First Take or SportsNation, for sure, but it is in no way a better show than PTI. Although you are right about the silly "skits" at times. But they always have smart opinions and back them up, whichever side they are on, and they often are on opposite sides but don't get pissy about it. And they almost always have a good guest for the 5-minute interview segment.
I think I just don't like ATH because of the panels more than the format. And I do really like Reali. There is rarely more than two people on ATH that I can tolerate at one time. Though I do watch more than I did when Marriotti was a regular.

 

I do like the 5-minute segment.

 

I agree with all of this. ATH isn't my favorite thing, and I realized I slagged it a bit earlier in this thread, but I do think it's the best of the yelly-shouty shows. Like, they do have some good debates from time to time, it's just that you have to deal with a lot of Woody Paige being ridiculous to get to it. And I think Reali did do a good job as the hall monitor, and rewarding the better guys with wins. (I'm sure it's compiled somewhere on the web, but I think J.A. and Bob Ryan won more than the Mariottis and Paiges of the world.)

 

Not even close to right...Mariotti/Paige have a combined 800.5 wins. Cowlishaw, Plaschke and Adande have 883. So the goofballs win.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Around_the_Horn#Active_panelist_statistics

 

I actually liked Paige in his earlier days on the WWL. He is becoming more of a caricature every day. Those are about the three I like ... Plaschke, Cowlishaw, Adande, and I could throw in Ryan, and McMullen is tolerable. Paige ruins it for me most of the time.

 

Try sorting it by their winning percentage.

 

Oh, well...then Lil Wayne and Mark Cuban are the best.

 

Somebody actually counted the "points" Jay Mariotti and Woody Paige "accumulated" in a fake contest of skill, arbitrated by Tony Reali, and then published it on Wikipedia.