Sources: KBME changing lineup (Jay Mohr to evening)

I do not care for Charlie. In my opinion:

Charlie is the guy on Houston radio I dislike the most. NEVER have I heard someone so in love with the sound of his own voice as that guy.

He is neither clever nor funny, and he thinks he is both, exceedingly so.

The only thing less funny than a genuinely un-funny person is a genuinely un-funny person who thinks he is hilarious.

The only thing less clever than a genuinely un-clever person is a genuinely un-clever person who thinks he is a genius.

How to be Charlie Pallillo:

1. Launch your radio day by spending several minutes talking about iHeartRadio. Also spend valuable minutes talking about how much effort you put into writing your daily 'Pallillog'. Claim that it is, once again, as always, very clever. Cleverly promise the listeners 'their money back' if they do not find it as clever as you do. Complain for more minutes about how there is no 'sports news of the day'. Special added bonus points if you do all of this in as close to an identical way as every other day before it.

2. Complain about George Springer not being on the Major League roster.

3. Complain about CSN Houston.

4. Call all of the above your 'monologue'.

5. Take a call. Listen to whatever the caller says, and then, no matter what the caller says, explain why the caller is wrong. It does not matter whether the caller agrees 100% with what you yourself said one minute prior - it only matters that you use your cleverness to explain why the caller is wrong.

6. Be sure to vary the cadence of your voice between apoplectic and completely disinterested.

7. Collect your paycheck while listening to people praise you for being so great.

8. Do the exact same thing tomorrow.

9. Profit!

 

Charlie must have embarrassed you on the air...

He's by far the most knowledgable/unbiased-yet-promoting Houston sports personality there is.

He's also the only one that will consistently talk Rockets (as has been the case since the early 90's)... and not just rah-rah "we love em" Matt Thomas stuff, but get into the nitty-gritty of what the team needs to do to win/improve.

 

He is told by management to promote iHeartRadio and the website.

"Believe it or Not" - now that's some quality radio right there.

 

secretly he's a houston hater and it comes out often, but i still like to listen to charlie and don't think he's nearly as bad as nero describes, although nero's description was entertaining

 

Nope, never called any show he hosts. I just don't like him, it's that simple. I know plenty of people kowtow to him as the greatest thing since sliced bread, but I don't.

 

I like Charlie, I only recently started listening to 790 since 610 talks about the Rockets 1 percent of the time and Charlie is the main one that talks about the Rockets.

However, the points above are correct and funny. He sure as hell does love bashing CSN. I like how he sighs about the astros anytime they're mentioned.

Was it yesterday that he was tripping balls about George Springer? That rant got annoying.

 

He's really not. In fact, I think he comes off as more "homer" than he really is, but knows that any respectable host should present both sides of the argument.

He gets giddy when sports teams here are good... frankly because more people take interest in this market, and call into sports shows, when sports teams are good.

Also, why else would he care as much about Springer and CSN if he "hates" Houston? He's been in the market over 20 years now... pretty long time to work some place you "hate".

 

I like Charlie, but I do agree he likes to hear himself talk. He lovesssss to mute his callers mid-comment to launch into rhetoric. Again, I do enjoy him though (I wish Matt Thomas had his hours, however) and I liked it better when Lance was with him. It kept him from being able to talk too much. People calling in to say that Lance was ruining his show was also hilarious to me.

 

I like Charlie to be honest from a pure sports standpoint.

He talks a lot of Rockets and is deeply knowledgeable about almost everything in sports unlike Lance who knows fotoball and football only and not much else.

What I don't like about Charlie is he loves to repeat stuff like the CSN debacle and loves to go on long responses to a particular caller.

MT is fine. I just find MT less of a sports talk show in its purest form and more of just an interaction with his producer Ross. Throw in a few callers, a few guests and some games like believe it or not and that's his show.

Overall I would rate them:

1. Charlie (talks lots of Rockets and is deeply knowledgeable. Has good guests like Bullard and McHale)
2. Matt Thomas (very personable and has good guests like Parsons, Bev)
.
.
.
.
.
.
3. Lance Zierlein and Adam Clanton (They both pretty much blow. Lance only talks football, knows very little basketball and Adam is just a gimmick who just does not fit well. He only gets time to start a topic or do the ads. Lance dominates air time. Only good thing is they interview Ackerman or Morey or Blank or Friedman for about 5 minutes each morning)

4. ND and Koch ( Don't care about a sports show that is 100% football and never listen to it for even a minute)

 

charlie's candor is what makes him so great, especially when callers make statements that when presented factually simply aren't true. he'll call them out. and when they make a great point he gives them a lot of credit. his no BS attitude is a breath of fresh air on sports radio and very complementary to Matt Thomas's somewhat whimsical one. i know his bashing of CSN can be a bit long-winded but hey, they're keeping 60% of us from seeing the product so CSN deserves it.

 

Haha

This is literally my exact thoughts

I think he secretly hates houston sports. Idk why he sticks around this market

 

Charlie loves Charlie which is annoying. Knowledgeable but boring, shouldn't be on the radio. Maybe a research or stat guy or author.

 

Yeah, I agree....very solid duo.

I will have to start flipping back and forth based on topic.

It was so nice to just have that one station and leave it there while I ate Chick Fil A in my car.

 

Charlie is very unbiased and emotionally detached...that's why it appears like he hates Houston sports.

But, from a standpoint of pure knowledge about facts, history, current events, etc... The guy is far and away the most knowledgeable. His memory bank is better than Wikipedia.

 

he wants springer up to make his job more relevant, same reason he likes it when the local teams are good, ever hear him shoot down where our all time greats stand? suggest to him that dream is better than duncan, or that biggio was better than alomar or sandberg, or where warren moon stands, where the rockets championship teams stand,

 

To say that Charlie flat out sucks is ludicrous. The guy carries 4 hours of air time every day by himself. That is no small feat.

Is he condescending? Yes. Is he a little rigid with callers? From time to time. But his rigidity is not a construct of a character, it is simply his personality trying to educate an otherwise ignorant caller.

 

Charlie's takes are second to none and when there is a pressing sports topic, he is who I want to listen too. But MT is certainly more entertaining and I look forward to having him back on during lunch.

 

Is he boring? Yes.

He's a sports radio host, not a book or an encyclopedia. He's not entertaining when's he paid to be. Should be stats guy or a corespondent.

Also how smart is he really when he ****s on stupid callers which are the majority of callers since no smart person waits for hours to get on the radio for 10 seconds only to have their take ignored.

It's like a food critic who hates food. Real smart!!!

-edit-
btw..., trying to educate stupid people is just as stupid. especially on the radio.

 

Pretty spot on.