He didn't even ask him about being pulled last night!!!

My reply to that was, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE RELEVANT THAN ASKING HIM TO DO A BORAT IMPRESSION!!!
- Jsaquella

I asked why he was a Richard to Bryz....he responded saying how did he do that. I simply said if I have to explain he was way out of touch.
- nastyflyergirl

Awesome....

Similar to the old television show All In The Family. The Archie and Michael characters were so perfectly balanced that it exposed those on both sides of nearly every issue.
- Scoob

Exactly. The best moments of the show came when Mike and Archie were skewering the others' side of the issue.

The big laughs came from Archie's quick temper and over-the-top ignorance, hypocrisy and (but never hateful) bigotry. But the show brilliantly showed that people like Michael were just as clueless as Archie in their own way.

People didn't even realize that Michael was just the opposite side of the same coin. For all his moralizing and higher education than Archie, had his own set of hypocrisies (often content to be unemployed, he has no problem living under Archie's roof and helping himself to the food that Archie's job put on the table) and was just as judgmental of people as Archie was.

Carroll O'Connor, who in real life held the opposite political views of Archie, portrayed Archie in such a way that you never hated him. In less skillful hands, Archie would have been a caricature rather than a character who seemed like a flesh-and-blood human being who may remind you of someone you know.

Every episode, the point was made clear that Archie was an ignorant, loud-mouthed, scheming, average IQ, bigot. But somehow you knew that his ranting and raving was mostly a front to hide his fears and frustrations and his heart was actually in the right place. In fact, when it came to things like making personal sacrifices for his family (even for Mike), Archie was a LOT more sympathetic than Mike ever was.

Mike's character was just as much a jab at 1970s white urban middle class background liberals as Archie's was a send up of out-of-touch working class background conservatives longing for a return to good old days that really weren't all that good (even for them).

That sort of dynamic was what made that show so brilliant. On the surface, Mike "won" the arguments -- which often ended with Archie blowing a raspberry or simply stalking out of the room -- but Archie gave it just as good as he got it.

Exactly. The best moments of the show came when Mike and Archie were skewering the others' side of the issue.

The big laughs came from Archie's quick temper and over-the-top ignorance, hypocrisy and (but never hateful) bigotry. But the show brilliantly showed that people like Michael were just as clueless as Archie in their own way.

People didn't even realize that Michael was just the opposite side of the same coin. For all his moralizing and higher education than Archie, had his own set of hypocrisies (often content to be unemployed, he has no problem living under Archie's roof and helping himself to the food that Archie's job put on the table) and was just as judgmental of people as Archie was.

Carroll O'Connor, who in real life held the opposite political views of Archie, portrayed Archie in such a way that you never hated him. In less skillful hands, Archie would have been a caricature rather than a character who seemed like a flesh-and-blood human being who may remind you of someone you know.

Every episode, the point was made clear that Archie was an ignorant, loud-mouthed, scheming, average IQ, bigot. But somehow you knew that his ranting and raving was mostly a front to hide his fears and frustrations and his heart was actually in the right place. In fact, when it came to things like making personal sacrifices for his family (even for Mike), Archie was a LOT more sympathetic than Mike ever was.

Mike's character was just as much a jab at 1970s white urban middle class background liberals as Archie's was a send up of out-of-touch working class background conservatives longing for a return to good old days that really weren't all that good (even for them).

That sort of dynamic was what made that show so brilliant. On the surface, Mike "won" the arguments -- which often ended with Archie blowing a raspberry or simply stalking out of the room -- but Archie gave it just as good as he got it.
- bmeltzer

Exactly. The best moments of the show came when Mike and Archie were skewering the others' side of the issue.

The big laughs came from Archie's quick temper and over-the-top ignorance, hypocrisy and (but never hateful) bigotry. But the show brilliantly showed that people like Michael were just as clueless as Archie in their own way.

People didn't even realize that Michael was just the opposite side of the same coin. For all his moralizing and higher education than Archie, had his own set of hypocrisies (often content to be unemployed, he has no problem living under Archie's roof and helping himself to the food that Archie's job put on the table) and was just as judgmental of people as Archie was.

Carroll O'Connor, who in real life held the opposite political views of Archie, portrayed Archie in such a way that you never hated him. In less skillful hands, Archie would have been a caricature rather than a character who seemed like a flesh-and-blood human being who may remind you of someone you know.

Every episode, the point was made clear that Archie was an ignorant, loud-mouthed, scheming, average IQ, bigot. But somehow you knew that his ranting and raving was mostly a front to hide his fears and frustrations and his heart was actually in the right place. In fact, when it came to things like making personal sacrifices for his family (even for Mike), Archie was a LOT more sympathetic than Mike ever was.

Mike's character was just as much a jab at 1970s white urban middle class background liberals as Archie's was a send up of out-of-touch working class background conservatives longing for a return to good old days that really weren't all that good (even for them).

That sort of dynamic was what made that show so brilliant. On the surface, Mike "won" the arguments -- which often ended with Archie blowing a raspberry or simply stalking out of the room -- but Archie gave it just as good as he got it.
- bmeltzer

Bill Meltzer. Renaissance Man. Expert on hockey, professional wrestling, media coverage of sports and comedy/satire.

Exactly. The best moments of the show came when Mike and Archie were skewering the others' side of the issue.

The big laughs came from Archie's quick temper and over-the-top ignorance, hypocrisy and (but never hateful) bigotry. But the show brilliantly showed that people like Michael were just as clueless as Archie in their own way.

People didn't even realize that Michael was just the opposite side of the same coin. For all his moralizing and higher education than Archie, had his own set of hypocrisies (often content to be unemployed, he has no problem living under Archie's roof and helping himself to the food that Archie's job put on the table) and was just as judgmental of people as Archie was.

Carroll O'Connor, who in real life held the opposite political views of Archie, portrayed Archie in such a way that you never hated him. In less skillful hands, Archie would have been a caricature rather than a character who seemed like a flesh-and-blood human being who may remind you of someone you know.

Every episode, the point was made clear that Archie was an ignorant, loud-mouthed, scheming, average IQ, bigot. But somehow you knew that his ranting and raving was mostly a front to hide his fears and frustrations and his heart was actually in the right place. In fact, when it came to things like making personal sacrifices for his family (even for Mike), Archie was a LOT more sympathetic than Mike ever was.

Mike's character was just as much a jab at 1970s white urban middle class background liberals as Archie's was a send up of out-of-touch working class background conservatives longing for a return to good old days that really weren't all that good (even for them).

That sort of dynamic was what made that show so brilliant. On the surface, Mike "won" the arguments -- which often ended with Archie blowing a raspberry or simply stalking out of the room -- but Archie gave it just as good as he got it.
- bmeltzer

What're your thoughts on String Theory?

He didn't even ask him about being pulled last night!!!

My reply to that was, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE RELEVANT THAN ASKING HIM TO DO A BORAT IMPRESSION!!!
- Jsaquella

I asked him if he would ask Simmonds to say something stereotypical. Still awaiting a response on that one. Maybe it's because I also tweeted it @ Simmonds.

I asked him if he would ask Simmonds to say something stereotypical. Still awaiting a response on that one. Maybe it's because I also tweeted it @ Simmonds.
- hereticpride

Better yet ask him to turn and as Ike that....See if he is still breathing after that.

What're your thoughts on String Theory?
- NickTheKid87

I asked him if he would ask Simmonds to say something stereotypical. Still awaiting a response on that one. Maybe it's because I also tweeted it @ Simmonds.
- hereticpride

I asked him if he would ask Simmonds to say something stereotypical. Still awaiting a response on that one. Maybe it's because I also tweeted it @ Simmonds.
- hereticpride

Well, making fun of some stereotypes is fun...

What're your thoughts on String Theory?
- NickTheKid87

I cracked up on that line. Awesome

Big Bang Theory fan I take it?

You reposted Bill's comments and called it insightful. One of the teams discussed was the Rangers in building their defense. My point in looking at the Forward side of things for the Rangers, is valid to the conversation and has to be considered when looking at the full picture.
- MJL

i'm not sure what you mean. are you comparing forwards to dmen or do you mean going forward? either way the flyers need to develop a certain # of dmen over a given period of time to keep from overpaying on a constant basis.

Well, making fun of some stereotypes is fun...
- Jsaquella

I'm italian and I laugh hysterically at some of the Italian stereotypes......but I feel what he did to Bryz, under the circumstances, what just too much. why should he do a single interview after that? of course if he didn't, Barkan would whine like a 2 year old kid

I cracked up on that line. Awesome

Big Bang Theory fan I take it?
- MJL

Actually no, I hate that show. I am a fan of theoretical physics though.

I'm italian and I laugh hysterically at some of the Italian stereotypes......but I feel what he did to Bryz, under the circumstances, what just too much. why should he do a single interview after that? of course if he didn't, Barkan would whine like a 2 year old kid
- nastyflyergirl

I'm Irish and Italian, and I have zero issue with ethnic humor. I have a big issue with malicious ethnic humor.

What Barkann did was childish and served to further his agenda-milk a pro athlete in the city for every bit of airtime they can and get fodder that can be stretched into unflattering sound bites or to make fun of somebody out of spite.

He cites contract for everything, even when it makes zero sense.
- NickTheKid87

hmmm i know a guy like that

I'm Irish and Italian, and I have zero issue with ethnic humor. I have a big issue with malicious ethnic humor.

What Barkann did was childish and served to further his agenda-milk a pro athlete in the city for every bit of airtime they can and get fodder that can be stretched into unflattering sound bites or to make fun of somebody out of spite.
- Jsaquella

Agreed it was pretty obvious what they were trying to do. It wasnt joking around about it, they were looking for ways to belittle the guy. Its funny cause in the 24/7 out of all the guys that they showed on the plane when the flyers were traveling, bryz was the only one reading a book....Go Figure.

I'm Irish and Italian, and I have zero issue with ethnic humor. I have a big issue with malicious ethnic humor.

What Barkann did was childish and served to further his agenda-milk a pro athlete in the city for every bit of airtime they can and get fodder that can be stretched into unflattering sound bites or to make fun of somebody out of spite.
- Jsaquella

yup

Exactly. The best moments of the show came when Mike and Archie were skewering the others' side of the issue.

The big laughs came from Archie's quick temper and over-the-top ignorance, hypocrisy and (but never hateful) bigotry. But the show brilliantly showed that people like Michael were just as clueless as Archie in their own way.

People didn't even realize that Michael was just the opposite side of the same coin. For all his moralizing and higher education than Archie, had his own set of hypocrisies (often content to be unemployed, he has no problem living under Archie's roof and helping himself to the food that Archie's job put on the table) and was just as judgmental of people as Archie was.

Carroll O'Connor, who in real life held the opposite political views of Archie, portrayed Archie in such a way that you never hated him. In less skillful hands, Archie would have been a caricature rather than a character who seemed like a flesh-and-blood human being who may remind you of someone you know.

Every episode, the point was made clear that Archie was an ignorant, loud-mouthed, scheming, average IQ, bigot. But somehow you knew that his ranting and raving was mostly a front to hide his fears and frustrations and his heart was actually in the right place. In fact, when it came to things like making personal sacrifices for his family (even for Mike), Archie was a LOT more sympathetic than Mike ever was.

Mike's character was just as much a jab at 1970s white urban middle class background liberals as Archie's was a send up of out-of-touch working class background conservatives longing for a return to good old days that really weren't all that good (even for them).

That sort of dynamic was what made that show so brilliant. On the surface, Mike "won" the arguments -- which often ended with Archie blowing a raspberry or simply stalking out of the room -- but Archie gave it just as good as he got it.
- bmeltzer

Perfect summary! Thanks.

I'm Irish and Italian, and I have zero issue with ethnic humor. I have a big issue with malicious ethnic humor.

What Barkann did was childish and served to further his agenda-milk a pro athlete in the city for every bit of airtime they can and get fodder that can be stretched into unflattering sound bites or to make fun of somebody out of spite.
- Jsaquella

That was terrible, but on top of that to call us all out in the final 3 minutes of his show and essentially say "he's rich, he sucks, it's therefore justified" Thats what really made me get angry.

Actually no, I hate that show. I am a fan of theoretical physics though.
- NickTheKid87

There are 22 dimensions. It's like twisting a roll of paper and then putting the ends together...which is really just a perversion of 2 dimensions. Also, useless until they invent time travel/faster-than-light travel.

Exactly. The best moments of the show came when Mike and Archie were skewering the others' side of the issue.

The big laughs came from Archie's quick temper and over-the-top ignorance, hypocrisy and (but never hateful) bigotry. But the show brilliantly showed that people like Michael were just as clueless as Archie in their own way.

People didn't even realize that Michael was just the opposite side of the same coin. For all his moralizing and higher education than Archie, had his own set of hypocrisies (often content to be unemployed, he has no problem living under Archie's roof and helping himself to the food that Archie's job put on the table) and was just as judgmental of people as Archie was.

Carroll O'Connor, who in real life held the opposite political views of Archie, portrayed Archie in such a way that you never hated him. In less skillful hands, Archie would have been a caricature rather than a character who seemed like a flesh-and-blood human being who may remind you of someone you know.

Every episode, the point was made clear that Archie was an ignorant, loud-mouthed, scheming, average IQ, bigot. But somehow you knew that his ranting and raving was mostly a front to hide his fears and frustrations and his heart was actually in the right place. In fact, when it came to things like making personal sacrifices for his family (even for Mike), Archie was a LOT more sympathetic than Mike ever was.

Mike's character was just as much a jab at 1970s white urban middle class background liberals as Archie's was a send up of out-of-touch working class background conservatives longing for a return to good old days that really weren't all that good (even for them).

That sort of dynamic was what made that show so brilliant. On the surface, Mike "won" the arguments -- which often ended with Archie blowing a raspberry or simply stalking out of the room -- but Archie gave it just as good as he got it.
- bmeltzer

you must be over 30 or something...

Exactly. The best moments of the show came when Mike and Archie were skewering the others' side of the issue.

The big laughs came from Archie's quick temper and over-the-top ignorance, hypocrisy and (but never hateful) bigotry. But the show brilliantly showed that people like Michael were just as clueless as Archie in their own way.

People didn't even realize that Michael was just the opposite side of the same coin. For all his moralizing and higher education than Archie, had his own set of hypocrisies (often content to be unemployed, he has no problem living under Archie's roof and helping himself to the food that Archie's job put on the table) and was just as judgmental of people as Archie was.

Carroll O'Connor, who in real life held the opposite political views of Archie, portrayed Archie in such a way that you never hated him. In less skillful hands, Archie would have been a caricature rather than a character who seemed like a flesh-and-blood human being who may remind you of someone you know.

Every episode, the point was made clear that Archie was an ignorant, loud-mouthed, scheming, average IQ, bigot. But somehow you knew that his ranting and raving was mostly a front to hide his fears and frustrations and his heart was actually in the right place. In fact, when it came to things like making personal sacrifices for his family (even for Mike), Archie was a LOT more sympathetic than Mike ever was.

Mike's character was just as much a jab at 1970s white urban middle class background liberals as Archie's was a send up of out-of-touch working class background conservatives longing for a return to good old days that really weren't all that good (even for them).

That sort of dynamic was what made that show so brilliant. On the surface, Mike "won" the arguments -- which often ended with Archie blowing a raspberry or simply stalking out of the room -- but Archie gave it just as good as he got it.
- bmeltzer

As a big fan of All In The Family, this is tremendous.

Exactly. The best moments of the show came when Mike and Archie were skewering the others' side of the issue.

The big laughs came from Archie's quick temper and over-the-top ignorance, hypocrisy and (but never hateful) bigotry. But the show brilliantly showed that people like Michael were just as clueless as Archie in their own way.

People didn't even realize that Michael was just the opposite side of the same coin. For all his moralizing and higher education than Archie, had his own set of hypocrisies (often content to be unemployed, he has no problem living under Archie's roof and helping himself to the food that Archie's job put on the table) and was just as judgmental of people as Archie was.

Carroll O'Connor, who in real life held the opposite political views of Archie, portrayed Archie in such a way that you never hated him. In less skillful hands, Archie would have been a caricature rather than a character who seemed like a flesh-and-blood human being who may remind you of someone you know.

Every episode, the point was made clear that Archie was an ignorant, loud-mouthed, scheming, average IQ, bigot. But somehow you knew that his ranting and raving was mostly a front to hide his fears and frustrations and his heart was actually in the right place. In fact, when it came to things like making personal sacrifices for his family (even for Mike), Archie was a LOT more sympathetic than Mike ever was.

Mike's character was just as much a jab at 1970s white urban middle class background liberals as Archie's was a send up of out-of-touch working class background conservatives longing for a return to good old days that really weren't all that good (even for them).

That sort of dynamic was what made that show so brilliant. On the surface, Mike "won" the arguments -- which often ended with Archie blowing a raspberry or simply stalking out of the room -- but Archie gave it just as good as he got it.
- bmeltzer

Beautifully put. I grew up watching All in the Family (on Nick at Night). I thought the show was funny, but didn't really catch the commentary. It really did a good job of putting a spotlight on the social stuff without making punching bags or caricatures.