Tuesday, April 15, 2014


Written By: LM

Sunday (4.13.2014), I wrote a post about an Sports Illustrated article John Lopez wrote four years ago.  John tried to explain, if you used the Wonderlic, Games Started, and Completion percentage, it could predict a Quarterback's NFL Success or Failure. I posted an article that disagreed with "The Lopez Rule".  Full Article Here .

I wrote what I had to say but John Lopez decided to validate his rule with an update posted on Sports Radio 610.  You can read it here.  All I can say is, the updated article was more convoluted than the initial article. IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE! but that male ego will drive a person to defend flawed takes.

I disagree with Lopez's Rule (26-27-60) but I did find  it interesting how his coworkers discussed it.

I believe, Brien Straw and Paul Gallant represents how most felt after reading the article.  The original nor the updated article makes any sense.  Don't take my word for it, here is Paul and Brien's Audio

Admittedly, I take shots at Nick Wright at times, but even I had no expectations of Nick cosigning on  ignorance (if its not his own work).  This morning, In The Loop dedicated some time for John to clarify and explain his rule.  I've been listening to Nick long enough to know if he totally agreed with John, they would have ran with it longer than halve a segemnt.  Nick basically paraphrased John's thoughts in a sentence. "You want your QB to have intelligence, experience and accuracy".  That sentence made more sense than both of John's articles.

All in all,  John is Nick's friend and I knew he wouldn't bury his guy.

It's one of those situations, I would've expected one of his co-workers to tell him "fallback and ignore it".



Written By: LM

I have been listening to the Blitz for two and a half years and the one thing that stood out to me; the guys love TV.

This is not a shot at the market but more of an observation.  Since I've been listening to the Blitz, I have known them to have dedicated days and segments to a particular TV Series.  Typically, the series is popular and generate huge fan interest.

  • Sons of Anarchy
  • Game Of Thrones
  • Breaking Bad
  • Justified
  • True Detective
  • Banjee

Just to name a few.  

Do not confuse my point, talking about TV Shows on Sports Radio is not innovative.  Most radio shows talk about  TV on their show in some form or fashion however Fred Faour and AJ Hoffman brought structure to it.  

For example, in the past, I would hear Marc Vandermeer talk about The Sopranos but it was organic in flow of discussion.   The Blitz actually have a dedicated time slot for "TV TALK".  

For the purpose of this article, I wanted to highlight that I am beginning to hear multiple local radio shows feature TV Shows.  I like it because it's more perspectives on shows I like.  I wish more shows would take it to the next level and bring in fans' perspective.  Some may not like it but in the football "off season",  it's solid and makes sense.

This is a lightweight article but I am always curious of what set the "norms" in play.  I like to trace it back to the source and the Blitz is the first local show I can recall covering TV Shows.


Sunday, April 13, 2014


Written By: LM

In John Lopez's defense, he can blame Shaun Bijani.  On Saturday morning, I was listening to Shaun Bijani.  Shaun began talking about an article that John Lopez wrote four years ago.

John wrote an article on SI.Com.,  The Rule of 26-27-60 predict NFL quarterback success or failure.  Shaun went on to apply some of John Lopez's logic to the current NFL.  I am not sure what conclusion Shaun arrived at because I wanted to read John's article.

According to John #TheRule - If an NFL prospect scores at least a 26 on the Wonderlic test, starts at least 27 games in his college career, and completes at least 60 percent of his passes, there's a good chance he will succeed at the NFL level, therefore the 26-27-60 Rule

The article is laid out with quantitative data.  As I began reading the article, I quickly realized that the data he provided was not supporting his argument.  One can read this article and make the case that the data goes against John's main premise.  The data is all over the place.  It looks like just a list of QBs.

After reading John's article, I honestly didn't know what he was trying to achieve.  He tries to give himself an out with "exceptions to the rule", but I think the article is an exception to logic.

Read the article at your own risk, but I have questions I need answered.

  • Did Shaun Bijani actually think "the rule" would help predict a QBs success?
  • Is this John Lopez's Rule?
  • Why has no other local personality, spoke of such a rule?
  • How would John Lopez use "the rule" in 2014?
  • How does "the rule" grade 2011, 2012 and 2013 drafted QBs?
  • What would make Sports Illustrated publish this?
  • Does John Lopez still believe in "the rule"?
It's becoming increasingly easier to ignore just about every football "take" from John.  At this point, I really wonder if he thinks before he speaks or writes for that matter.  Just last week, John wrote an article on Sports Radio 610 titled "If You Want Clowney at No. 1, You Lose the Right to Complain. Ever".  If you think the title is funny, you should read the article.  This article is funnier than the 26-27-60 rule. Rarely do I read "stateofthetexans.com", which is run by Patrick Starr, but even one of his contributors, Brian McDonald, analyzed John's article.

It's crystal clear, John is not a "football guy", but I am beginning to wonder if we are witnessing something.  Is Ryan McCreeden SR 610 (Program Director) changing John Lopez into Skip Bayless right before our eyes?


Friday, April 11, 2014


Written by: Angelo Lawford
Date posted: 4/11/2014

You might have to bare with me, as I try to make this connection make sense. Some of you might find it to be a stretch and not necessarily see the connection or understand the point trying to be made. But I am coming from a good place.

You see, as a soccer fan, I envy golf for what it seems to be able to do as an international sports product. Golf is able to generate a rather consistent stream of media attention both nationally and locally, that soccer hasn't been able to consistently generate as an international sports product within the confines of our national and local medias. And I don't really understand why.

Golf isn't nearly the everyman sort of game or sport that soccer seemingly is and I struggle to wonder how or why the sport seems so relatable to so many, in comparison to soccer as true international and not dynamically domestic sports products, if that makes sense. I often wonder what golf did or what golf has that soccer hasn't yet done or doesn't have that makes the media be able to relate to golf and promote golf the way that it seems to do.

Both golf and soccer have strong European origins, but somehow, golf seems less foreign than soccer, from a media perspective anyway. I don't get how our national and local medias can connect to a Rory McIlroy, a Steve Elkington, or a Sergio Garcia, all of the PGA tour, but struggle to connect with a Steven Gerrard, a Frank Lampard, or a Cristiano Ronaldo, who are all renowned international soccer players. 

The thought comes simply because here locally in Houston, another Shell Houston Open has come and gone and I was intrigued by the local media resources that were allocated to this four-day event.

I get it. The Shell Houston Open is an annual middle-upper to full upper tier stop on the PGA tour and it is a solid showcase for the city. So a pretty extensive amount of  local media coverage really goes without saying, and understandably so.

But here is the thing. Did the local media resources allocated, match the local interest? Or more importantly to me, where was this stream of coverage for say, the international soccer friendly played here at Reliant Stadium in front of a sellout crowd, last May, that featured a match-up between the Mexican and Nigerian national teams? Or for the 2011 CONCACAF Gold Cup elimination matches that were played to sellout crowds at Reliant Stadium? 

I think the question that I have yet to really be given a clear answer to, is this, what science or data does the media use or acquire, to in turn determine what the public wants to consume?

Earlier last week, the United States Men's National Team (USMNT) hosted the Mexican national team in an international friendly played in Arizona. The two teams played to a rather entertaining 2-2 draw in what is generally regarded as one of the better team rivalries in the entire world of team sports.

The game also saw current Houston Dynamo captain, Brad Davis, play a fairly prominent role in the game for USMNT head coach, Jurgen Klinsmann, as Davis looks to make a late push to hopefully capture a spot on the upcoming USMNT World Cup roster come this summer in Brazil

What does this have to do with the Shell Houston Open or golf? Here it is. Locally, despite the media coverage given towards the Shell Houston Open, from an interest level, in this international market, is it a guarantee, that the Shell Houston Open generated more organic interest as a singular event than the international friendly between the USMNT and Mexico played last Tuesday? 

Considering where Houston sits on the map and for also not so very obvious reasons, my guess is locally, the international friendly resonated with enough of the local public, to at least require an allocated resource, to at the very least, have any eye on the game.
Which makes me ask this serious question. A digging down deep within the soul kind of question that I mean with the utmost sincerity and respect. Do the local program directors in THIS particular city (in understanding that the sports talk radio genre, is the backbone of all things media in this market) have any real obligation to the diversity of this city when it comes to how they allocate their media resources? Not just the diversity of its people, but also of interests.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think the coverage given to the Shell Houston Open was irresponsible per se. But to not allocate a local resource to an event the magnitude of the Mexico vs. USMNT friendly played in Arizona given the Houston Dynamo and regional connections or previous international soccer events held here locally, does seem a bit irresponsible, given what we know our local landscape to be. 

I thought when Houston (as a market) decided to prioritize local sports matters in comparison to national sports matters, I thought it could also be a gateway in relating to sports fans in a way most markets couldn't even fathom. Houston as a market when taking into account its people, can do things no other market can do. And I thought there would be an unprecedented connection to the local body of people. But I guess I was a bit na├»ve.

Anyhow, I am done ranting. I just hope at least some of you understand the point. I honestly and down deep in my bones, just believe that this market deserves something more and something better.

Angelo Lawford


Thursday, April 10, 2014



Based on our research at HMW and what we believe to be the "bottom line" reasoning behind Jay Mohr in middays on Sports Talk 790, we've reached the following conclusion. .

The obvious and highly probable major change in programming coming to Sports Talk 790 according to our information is Matt Thomas will have to return to the Sports Talk 790's midday lineup.  The Matt Thomas Show following the number one sports talk show in Houston,  In The Trenches (ITT), hosted by former NFL players ND Kalu and Greg Koch, would be a win-win for Sports Talk 790. Thomas will likely be slotted 11a-2p, with Charlie Pallilo remaining in evening drive, likely moving his show's start time up to 2p.

Our information at HMW leads us to suggest the final piece of the equation would be Jay Mohr moving to nights in the form of a pre recorded broadcast. That move allows the station to maintain the national sponsor dollars associated with Mohr's show.