An Interview With Howard Berger


by mike in boston / @mikeinboston / hatemailaccount at gmail


With the start of the hockey season upon us I reached out to long time FAN590 Leafs beat reporter Howard Berger for some comments on life on the road and the state of the industry. Howard's thoughts on the Leafs and all things in the world of sports can be found at Berger Bytes. I strongly recommend reading his two excellent pieces on the 25th anniversary of PTS here and here.


Howard graciously invited me into his home and spent 3 hours talking with me. Here is (most of) our conversation.




Did you always know you wanted to work in sports?


Well, sports was always in my family growing up. Watching TV in the mid to late 60s, I got it from my dad and so it was always something I was really interested in. I always said that it would be my dream to cover a hockey club day and night.


Did you go to school for journalism? How did you end up at CJCL?


I went through high school and I wasn't in a very good student. I paid attention to what I was interested in, and not much to the stuff I wasn't. I was always good in English and I could write and speak well. After high school I was probably the only person you wanted to do journalism who turned down Ryerson. I went to Humber College because you can apply your trade a little more quickly. In 1978 and 79, as part of a school project, I covered the North York Rangers for a whole season as a beat writer.


Through that I got my first job writing for the Etobicoke Guardian. After that I very briefly worked out in Calgary, then in the early 80s I freelanced in Toronto for a bit and got to know people. Then Ken Daniels introduced me to Allan Davis who ran the network for Telemedia who owned CJCL 1430 and one thing led to another and I started working for the station.


In 1988 The Blue Jays rights were coming up for renewal and they suggested to the station that they would like it to have more of a sports presence. At that time the station was still doing music during the day – "music if your life" was what they called it … but the running joke was that it was the music of your death – but no sports during the day. So I was hired as the gopher to go around with the microphone and cover interviews and press conferences. The general manager, a guy named Doug Ackhurst, was so embarrassed at what they were paying me – $275 a week – he said why don't you come in just a few hours a week. But for me I was so happy to have the job and didn't care what I was being paid, so I would put in 12 hour days and do everything I could to show my worth, which led to them putting me in bigger and better situations.


Was there excitement about the station transitioning towards all sports?


The Jays were doing really well and Bob was doing his show and now they had me doing interviews and I also did Saturday and Sunday morning sportscasts. The FAN in New York and the one in Philadelphia were doing well, and in Toronto we were in a market where you had to find some kind of niche because just about very radio station on AM was already doing music. We weren't doing great because before 7pm we were being destroyed by CHUM. So it was a risk to go all-sports but the alternative was worse. So, in 1989, I went to Doug and told him that I couldn't afford to live on what I was making anymore and that I was willing to work 8 days a week if necessary. He called me in a day later and told me he was binging me on full-time and would double my salary and put me to work on developing the concept for Prime Time Sports. They wanted something that would lead in to the ballgames and a regular talk show wasn't going to cut it. It was really important that PTS make it because the viability of the station was riding on it. And it worked. It was a perfect storm … the Jays were improving, the Argos won in 1991, then the two World Series championships, then the Gilmour trade … all of that helped.


Prime Time Sports


Did you enjoy being the producer for PTS?


Absolutely. It was great to be there on the ground floor of the roundtable format.You didn't want just guys off the street talking sports and so we went out and got big names in Canadian sports. And Bob and I decided to keep consistent pairings rather than having whoever was available. But at the beginning we were flying by the seat of our pants in terms of content … often Bob would come in 30 seconds before we went live and he would look at the sheet I had put together. Nine times out of ten he would glare at me and say "this is crap" but then he would just do the first segment flawlessly.


That's his talent. Bob was always an entrepreneur and had businesses he ran during the day which took up most of his time. So he would come in and wouldn't be aware of even the major breaking stories. But then we would go to a 3 minute commercial set and I would press the button from the control room and fill Bob in, and we would come back and he would pull it off as if he had been studying all day.


So Bob's comments about he does no show prep are true and that's always been the case?


Well, he used to live close to the Holly Street studio and I would go over to his house and talk, and Bob was one-on-one a great person to talk to, and I would fill him in on what we were doing. I don't think he was lazy … he was just busy with other things. And he knew that between me and Bill Watters, we could bring him enough up to speed where his natural ability would take over. Now, I'm not saying he was BS'ing. The audience would have been able to tell. He was incredible, he just had a way of pulling it off and I assume he still does. But back then, he knew that I would do the groundwork and I was always there as a back-up, as was Bill.


Was Bob's curmudgeon persona as prevalent back then?


Yeah. It was his shtick. But I don't think it's that far off who he is in real life. He and I were both type-A and occasionally we would blow up like crazy and so I don't think his persona is artificial. But it's definitely a shtick he plays for the audience. The same is true of Don Cherry. He's the quietest and nicest man you'd ever meet. He goes out of his way to help others less fortunate than himself. But he goes on the air and delivers what makes money. And so does Bob.


What should the FAN do when Bob retires?


It's the same situation HNIC has with Coach's Corner. And I think in that situation there will be no more Coach's Corner; they'll do something else. With PTS, there probably are people who can do it and it will be an adjustment, but I don't think the show will die without him. I think it might be a different show, but PTS is a brand now unto itself and the format could continue without Bob. That said, I don't have the impression wants to give it up any time soon. He makes a lot of money, works essentially 3 hours a day, and does a terrific job. He's among the most recognizable sports faces in the country.




How did you transition to doing Leafs full-time?


Back in 1994 I was essentially the station's reporter and would go cover stories and get sound, including home Leafs games. But with the lockout I was going to New York all the time to cover negotiations. When the NHL lockout was over I got a call from Warwick Publishing, with whom I had worked, asking me if the FAN would be OK with me writing a book about being on the road with the team. They offered to pay the costs of my travel, so I figured the station would be fine with it and they were. And the station had the broadcast rights so they worked me in to the pre-game and intermission. So the station was really happy about it. Then the FAN lost the radio rights to 640 in 1995 and it was a real stroke of luck for me because Doug Ackhurst decided to put me on the beat full-time and have the station pay for it. And that was pretty groundbreaking that we don't get enough credit for … we basically invented the role of the every day radio beat reporter.


How did you conceive of your job? Whose interests were you trying to serve with your reporting?


I got myself in a little trouble at the beginning when I did the weekend morning sportscasts. I was too much of a Blue Jays fan, to be honest with you, and so if Jimmy Williams botched something I would go on air full of piss and vinegar and be giving it to him. But I worked for great people who had my back. So Allan called me in and said: "look I know you're doing well, you know you're doing well because of the feedback you're getting, but the Blue Jays have got to know you too because you cover them, and you're going overboard on the editorial stuff. Not that what you're saying is wrong but you really haven't been around long enough to be saying these things. You have to earn that type of freedom."


So, I guess some people at the Jays had mentioned it to Allan and he mentioned it to me, and I said you're right. I can see that point of view and had to tone it down a bit without turning into a cheerleader. That's the way I felt and still do about how the Maple Leafs should be covered … with a critical eye. I tried to cover them on radio the way a writer would for a newspaper. And we were fortunate because we weren't encumbered by any broadcast rights issues – I'm not saying the rights holders now are encumbered – nor were we half-owned by the team itself as things are now. So, no one said to me "here's how to cover the Leafs," so I just went and did it the way I felt it should be done. And once that was established, then I would take heat from Leafs fans for being hard on the team, but if I ever went soft then my bosses would call me in and turn me around.


There was only one exception. Pat Quinn and I had a terrible relationship the first few years he was coach. He was very combative and so he and I always clashed. Nelson Millman came in one day and called me aside and said "I'm not telling you what to do …" – and this is what was great about Nelson: he never told anyone what to do – "but there is a bit of a perception out there that it's a personal thing between you and Pat." And I was mortified because I always thought I kept things separate. So when he said that then I knew I had to make an adjustment. So it wasn't an act on my part. Here we had a team that had not been to the Cup final in 25 years. Expansion teams were passing them. And I thought this was a team that deserved to be covered with a critical eye.


Your dispute with Ron Wilson made headlines. Was he especially difficult to deal with relative to other coaches?


No. You couldn't find a better guy away from the action. You're born a certain way, and you are who you are, and Ron was a guy who spoke his mind. People all saw the press conference where we argued and assume that this is the way all of our interactions were and that's not true. It was the exception to the rule.


When I asked him the question about Spezza's stick he answered it honestly and didn't seem annoyed about it. After the next game I asked the first question, as I usually did, and Wilson had been laying in wait all day for me, and so when I asked him if he was annoyed about the imbalance between penalty calls during the game, that's when he let loose with his "I'm annoyed at YOU" comment and we went back and forth. And this was really an exception. People who know me know that I wasn't someone who was loud or tried to puff out my chest. I mostly went about my job quietly. But I wasn't going to let him get away with that.


And it became this huge story. I remember being told by James Cybulski – I think – who was covering the GM meetings for TSN … "Howard, you're the hit of this meeting!" because apparently someone's iPhone was being passed around the room and Burke wanted to see it. Of course Burke would never admit this, but they were all laughing and having a good time with it. The next day I did 11 interviews I think. But, anyway, a week later I walked out of the rink and Wilson was there doing something on his phone. So I put my arm around his shoulder and said "You're nuts! You're 4th or 5th in total wins, and I'm going to say something to impugn your integrity? Why?" So we laughed and and that was it. Everybody thinks to this day that we're enemies but we're not.


Was that kind of burying the hatchet characteristic of your relations with the players too?


Absolutely. I can't think of any players who I really didn't like. Darcy Tucker and I fought endlessly. He listened to the station all the time and if I said something about how he played lousily he would go after me. I had a whole incident with Owen Nolan. He told me his back was "about to explode" and that he was going to need surgery. So I went with it, but then Nolan denied making those comments. But I had it on tape. I remember sitting in this arena in Sweden and Mike Hogan was on the air. And we played back his original comment and then the denial. I didn't want to make him look bad, but he had just gone into a scrum and essentially said that Howard Berger had fabricated this story. So I had to stand up for myself. And we patched things up eventually. You could tell he wasn't happy with me, but one day a few months later I ran into him coming out of the practice arena and I asked him why he had denied it. And he said "it's water under the bridge … I thought maybe you'd protect me." So, I told him that I understood and I never had another problem with him. He's my Facebook friend now.


Did players respect the job you had to do?


Any Leaf player knows what it's like to play in Toronto and respects the media's job. I remember covering Mats Sundin – the finest gentleman I have ever had the pleasure of covering – in his first interview after coming to the Leafs in exchange for Wendel Clark. And we all came to know Mats' impressive command in interviews, but at the time he was so incredibly nervous. Before you get to Toronto you learn what it's going to be like, if not because of your agent then because of some other media person you know.


But you still have to be professional as a member of the media. You're going into the room when someone has just thrown the puck away to lose the game, and it's not like failing at a regular job. Everybody sees it, and so you have to take that into consideration when you enter the locker room. And I think that builds trust too. I think my record has shown that both players and managers could trust me in how I did my job. I can't tell you the number of times John Ferguson would pour his heart out to me when things weren't going well. He would sit with me and he knew the specifics weren't going anywhere. The whole key to being a reporter, especially a Leafs reporter, is you have to cultivate trust. It doesn't mean they won't still get ticked off at you, but that really helps people work through issues with you.


And there are some people in the business, I won't name names, who have an agenda when they go to do their work. I never did. Pat Quinn felt I did at times, but I didn't. In his final 4 years he became like an uncle to me. The key was going to practice with an idea – sometimes an obvious one – but often it was my own idea for a storyline. That was harder work than just following the story lines dictated by the papers or electronic media, or even worse, reporting on line combinations.


When did the decision to take you off road games happen?


Summer of 2009. Before that, in summers of '95, '96, '97 I would always ask if we were going to continue covering the team full time. And they would say yes, and I would wait for seat sales and go book a block of tickets for the trips. After a while, it was just part of the cost of doing business at an all-sports radio station and I stopped needing to ask. That said, I would still usually give Doug Farraway a courtesy call before I booked anything in the summer. In the summer of '09 I got an email from Doug saying "check with me before booking anything." And that was a red flag. So I called him and he told me that we were not going to do every game this year, and weren't going to travel during the pre-season. So I put together a schedule were I eliminated a bunch of trips and just focused on the longer road swings. But it turned out there had been a major financial clampdown and I think I did one third road games in 09-10. And I could sense that this was the beginning. The next year I did no road games.


I'm not going to get into the details, but Don Kollins had a different mandate than Nelson. The economy had gone south and the radio station was not making as much money. And they felt this was one aspect they could cut back on. Needless to say, I disagreed. I told Don as much: this isn't personal, I know what your mandate is, you've come from Kitchener with your family, you're making good money at this job, I don't begrudge you anything. Yet, even with all of that, the decision didn't make sense to me. And I can't claim to be objective about it, but of all the things to cut back in the city of Toronto … covering the Leafs? I didn't get it.


640 had the rights and had Jonas Siegel, and that was the main competition for sports. When Nelson was at the FAN and particularly when Ted Rogers was still alive, the whole mandate was built around competition and wanting to win. And as I said, I just assumed that going on the road was an accepted part of the cost of doing business. So, not only did this decision take away something I loved and was a huge privilege, I never accepted the logic behind it.


The problem showed itself in the playoffs the next year. What do I do for those two months when I had for the previous 11 years been the busiest guy at the station? So I took it upon myself to go in and spend an hour with Andrew Krystal on his show, but I didn't want to just sit around and collect a salary. But when you're so involved and then go to doing this in May and June? It never got to the point where we were arguing, Don and me, but there was nothing for me to do.


Perhaps they saw the co-ownership of the team coming, and maybe I was a bit too "hot" for them. That's just a guess. I watch Sportsnet's coverage and there is a bit of infomercial to it, but how can there not be when you have invested that much money. I see it as a conflict of interest.


It looks like they are not going to replace David Alter and will go without a radio beat reporter. Are you surprised?


I think the way they look at it is that Chris Johnston covers the team for Sportsnet and that means the company has a presence and that's good enough because it's the bigger thing – the TV element. And I can't argue with that – it's cross-promotion. Rogers is not in the sports business so that the FAN does well, it's in the sports business so that Sportsnet does well.


I recall before I was fired we were all called into a theatre and Scott Moore – who I have great respect for – stood up in front of us and said "I didn't come here to finish 2nd to TSN. We are going to make inroads." None of us were thinking 5.2 billion dollars. Many people rolled their eyes, but look at what he's done. I'm not saying TSN is going to die, because they kept a bunch of their key people, but Rogers wrestled TV rights away and you have to hand it to him. But, I think that you have to have a radio guy there there. Not for ratings, because those are generated by the hosts. But you need a beat guy for credibility.


I agree. Scott MacArthur's recent interview with Colby Rasmus testifies to the value of a radio beat guy. The travel budget has to be tiny in the grand scheme of things. 


I heard that interview. I had a couple of those with Gilmour, one in particular the year they traded him to New Jersey. He wasn't happy, the team was falling apart, and I met him at a hotel in Santa Monica. I knew he wasn't in a great mood but I had become tight with him and asked him for a quote for my pre game report, thinking he's just give me the regular stuff. But he just took a breath and poured his heart out.


So, I can't say what they are thinking. I said my piece, I told them what I thought was best and they decide otherwise. Let's talk numbers: suppose for argument's sake it's $100,000 to send a guy on the road … it's probably less than that, but whatever. You get a sponsor for $30,000. Is Rogers a company that can't afford the remaining balance? I know how they used me when I had the job and I was on all day everyday, so they got quite a return in the investment. But I don't know how things are now.


Does this give TSN Radio an advantage?


Let me be clear: I have a huge amount of respect for the people at Sportsnet and the FAN. If you read any story since I was let go I have always recognized that the FAN is responsible for the profile – whatever it is – that I have today. So I am not going to blast them.


Put it this way. If I were new to the city, and there's two sports radio stations. And on the day of the game I want to get the quickest info on the radio. Am I going to go to the station with the full time person with the Leafs or the one that doesn't? If you're a real die-hard there's no question.


The other side is the perception in terms of credibility. The FAN didn't "need" to send me on the road to cover the playoffs when the Leafs weren't in it. They could have gotten tape from any number of places. But when I went on the road I would wait for a lull and get my voice on tape as part of the scrum, and that kind of thing matters … it's a little extra thing that establishes that you're there on the ground and asking the questions as opposed to some other person. And that feeds the perception in the eyes of the audience … it makes the radio side sound big time. Maybe the strategy is different now that the radio and TV are so closely connected. I don't know.


The Industry


The Strombo hiring seems to be about drawing in a new audience. What do you think about this strategy? Is there a risk of alienating your existing audience?


I think what they saw was that their demographics were in the late 30s and 40s. These people have finished buying. What you want is to get younger: 18-30, when people are looking for houses, and furniture, and cars. That's the demo everyone wants to get to. To make up 5.2 billion dollars, Rogers' advertising people are going to have to working 24 hours per day, and my guess is that George is the answer. Ron was established, he's a legend. But he's in the older demo. George gets you into that buyer's demo.


The only risk I see is how Rogers' ownership stake in the Leafs will be perceived outside of Toronto. Out West they are going to be watching closely to see if HNIC people are favouring the Leafs. Other than that … it's hockey and it's a religion here. And if you give Strombo a chance, you'll see that the guy can do everything well. You may not like his style, but there's nothing he can't do as an interviewer and host, whether he's talking to the Prime Minister or a 3rd line centre. He's proven he can do it. That doesn't mean Ron is less good. It's just different.


Do you think there is any basis to the theory that Bettman's fights with Ron affected negotiations and the eventual death of HNIC on CBC?


No, not from a business side. Rogers wanted editorial control over everything. I don't believe the Bettman/MacLean thing had anything to do with it. I know Gary well, I get along with him well. Ron is like a brother to me. I sat down with Gary in his office after the FAN let me go. He asked me what happened and I told him. I asked him about MacLean. He told me on the record that Ron was more of an entertainer and not as much of a journalist, and that he thought Ron had gone overboard in his line of questioning. I wrote a blog about it, and Ron got back to me to tell his side. There's clearly something there … they are not at the top of each other's Christmas card lists. But, when someone comes along with 5.2 billion dollars then that is what matters.


Do you have a prediction about what will happen to TSN?


I suspect not much will change. I thought there would be major defections but they managed to keep their people. The Rogers deal happened in November but by the new year it was clear almost everyone was staying at TSN. I don't think it was just about money. I think it was about loyalty to that network, but also I think they felt commonly "slighted" by the NHL. And I think they like each other. You can tell they have great chemistry on those panels. And no disrespect to Sportsnet, but the other night after the game ended, I switched over to TSN because I wanted to hear what the pioneers had to say about the game.


Did you have a problem with Dave Feschuk's use on anonymous sources in the Kessel story?


I found it to be a very interesting story. I think Dave is a credible journalist. I don't think he made it up or embellished it. I have been through it. You get a story and it gets corroborated by someone else. But you can't go fully public while still protecting the source. I think Dave probably did all he could to verify and talk to sources. He probably spoke to his superiors at the Star with what he had. If you have a story and you know there is some truth to it then you have to go with it. With the level of competition in the industry, especially Leafs – and this is what I loved about my job – you want to be first. And sometimes that means not identifying a source. If you did it every day that would be bad. But you can pick your spots. And I guarantee that the Star knew what Dave was doing.


Do you try to stay in touch with sources and break news?


Not as much. I still do talk to scouts and GMs but with Twitter now everyone claims to be first on anything that breaks. Does it even matter anymore who is first? It used to matter because radio was the only real-time medium. Nowadays the size of the story matters much more. And you can see the dangers of trying to be first. Pat Burns had to call people to tell say "I'm still alive."


What's your plan going forward?


I'm really enjoying doing the blog. I'm in constant redesign mode. It gives me a chance to continue doing what I did all those years in radio: react to something I see, and tell it the way I see it. Most of the time when people got annoyed with me it was because I was saying something they didn't want to hear but knew had an element of truth to it. All that time at the FAN what I was told was to give strong opinions: be fair, be accurate, don't cross that line and make it personal, but give me all you got. That's changed a little now due to the media landscape. What do I want to do now? Well, I'm available. But it has to be the right fit. You can't stay stuck in the past – I can't just talk about Doug Gilmour anymore since you have to be over 30 to remember it – but having experience still matters.




Thank you so much to Howard for agreeing to talk with me, and for his candid answers. Speaking for myself, I miss his voice on the radio

Have a great weekend everyone, and thanks for reading.

mike (in boston)

About the Author
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
October 18, 2014 7:13 pm

Terrific interview with one of sports radio’s finest. I enjoyed Howard’s work over the many years at The Fan.

October 18, 2014 8:15 pm

Berger: “but of all the things to cut back in the city of Toronto … covering the Leafs? I didn’t get it.” & “Perhaps they saw the co-ownership of the team coming, and maybe I was a bit too “hot” for them. That’s just a guess. ”

An apt guess. With all the blogs and social media out there and with 5.2 B on the line, it wouldn’t be appropriate or advantageous to have an agitator first up in every post-game media scrum – be it Berger or anyone else. The risk on the other side of that equation is to have a shill a la Paul Hendrick floating softballs at the Leafs coach & players. A Rogers beat reporter is a lose-lose proposition. The money and the game got bigger than Howard Berger.

What I don’t get is why, after a few years, someone in the combative Toronto sports radio environment hasn’t made Berger a regular segment – be it once a week or three times a week or five. Put Berger on with Jeff Blair and sparks will fly. Blair isn’t afraid of launching rockets at his employer. Aside from controversial comments, I don’t think there is another sports media personality in Toronto that draws from as deep a well on Leafs knowledge than Berger. ( Bill Watters would be one, miss that guy too ) All I can think is that something happened that burned not just the bridge that Berger had to Rogers, but any future bridges as well; something is untold here. But great interview. Read it twice. And I follow Berger’s blog.

October 19, 2014 12:27 am

Howard Berger was a breath of fresh air at the FAN and would be a fresh air now compared to some of the personalities in the Rogers empire at the FAN! I admired Howard’s work because he always asked the tough questions to MLSE, called them out on their actions (trades/firings/hirings) and spoke on behalf of the frustrated Leafs fan that was sick and tired of the malarkey always spoon fed over the years.

October 19, 2014 9:05 am

Anyone else surprised TSN hasn’t gone after Howard and used him on segments?

October 19, 2014 9:55 am

Thanks for a great read. Always been a big fan of Howard when he was at the Fan.In regards to a full-time radio beat guy, and with all the TV talking heads is it really necessary to have one. They follow the team just as closely, if anything were to break someone would be on the radio in short order. I agree maybe there is something else as in to why no major outlet has picked him up since he left the Fan.

Billy Bob
Billy Bob
October 19, 2014 1:03 pm

Good interview

October 19, 2014 2:32 pm

Howard has not completely disappeared, he writes a good blog that is a well written and an enjoyable read.

Now, my own two-cents on what happened with his broadcasting career.

Essentially, my guess is that his act just got tired. Both for his employers and his listeners. Personally, I found that his work became stale and predicable for his last few years at The Fan (the numerous times he would interview Matt Stajan, for instance. Athletes are the worst interviews on the planet and Stajan was, clearly, the worst of that lot). After his old position of traveling with the team was removed, I believe he took that personally and that was reflected in his work which, for me, made for disappointing radio.

I always had the feeling that because of his experience, he started to take himself too seriously, which eventually led to a sense of entitlement. He no longer had that “carte blanch” anymore and that made him angry. If you read between the lines in this interview, I believe he still harbours some anger toward management’s decision – no matter how he couches it, unfortunately.

John in Bolton
John in Bolton
October 19, 2014 9:35 pm

I worked with Howard for a time at the Fan. He was one of the nice guys there. Hope he finds his way back on the air soon.

October 20, 2014 7:31 am

Always liked Howard. One of the few guys I’d turn the channel to listen to if he were on, great interview

Mark Hebscher
October 20, 2014 9:03 am

I spent a lot of time on the road with Howard, and I can say categorically that nobody worked harder at getting the story (and getting it right) than H.B.) He held people accountable as well, something that is necessary in today’s sports media coverage. He asked questions that others were afraid to. Thanks to TSM for this interview. Very revealing.

October 20, 2014 12:21 pm

This more or less confirms what people have been saying about the FAN under Kollins. The bean-counters are in charge and are making short sighted financial decisions. Sportsnet in general doesn’t seem to have much respect for the craft of radio.

Great comments by Howard.

October 20, 2014 2:27 pm

I think HB makes a great point about switching over to TSN after games. I’m not likely to spend alot of time watching pre & post game shows because I have zero confidence that anyone on Rogers would ever say anything negative about the product. I can’t wait to see Damion Cox tapdance the first time there’s an incident during a game that would have had him attacking “The Game” in the past. I have 30 years of turning on TSN first, that’s not going to change quickly, if at all. As for watching the games, they invented the remote control so you don’t have to watch commercials. I’m not sure how me changing channels at every stoppage and intermission helps earn back the 5.2B Rogers paid for the rights.

Nan Young Lee
Nan Young Lee
October 20, 2014 8:51 pm

Great interview Mike. Berger’s thoughtful answers were to be expected by anyone who heard him on the radio. I read his book “On the Road: An Inside View of Life with and NHL Team” a couple of years ago. It was a interesting view on the life of a beat reporter and was open to a generative principle of sports culture over the course of a season.

“John Shannon @JSportsnet · 21 hours ago
As @DamoSpin announced on Home Town Hockey,TJ Brodie’s deal will be 5 years/4.65 mil per year…key for Flames is 3 years of UFA life.”

This makes it seem like Damien originated the story, which wasn’t the case:

“SPT ‏@HabsAvs 21 hours ago
@JSportsnet @DamoSpin nice try. As usual @TSNBobMcKenzie tweeted the info this am.”

What Damien also “announced” on his various appearances over the weekend:

1) A Habs fan threw a Leafs jersey on the ice:

“Damien Cox @DamoSpin · Oct 17
So word is it was a Habs fan who threw the Leaf jersey on the ice. Sorta drains all the supposed symbolism from the event.”

2) Jaden Schwartz was American:

“Damien Cox @DamoSpin · Oct 18
Mistakenly referred to Jaden Schwartz as an American in post-game show. He is, of course, from Saskatchewan. Apologies to the Schwartz clan.”

3) Reto Berras was Karri Ramos or vice versa:

“Damien Cox @DamoSpin · 22h
Oy. Can’t keep my Reto Berras straight from my Karri Ramos tonight. Forgive me.”

Surprisingly he was right about JS Giguere being on HNIC. Not suprising was the response from “mitchell guy”:

“Damien Cox @DamoSpin · Oct 18
The rookie – JS Giguere joins the Hockey Night in Canada panel tonight”

“mitchell guy ‏@MitchellCGuy Oct 18
@DamoSpin hopefully in your seat”

Has Mark Messier been replaced already? Or will he alternate with Giguere? And what is Strobo bringing to the show? It’s not an intelligent presentation. It might be what Gilbert Gottfried (or was it Norm MacDonald) in “Live From New York: An Uncensored History Of Saturday Night Live” called SNL after the early, glory years, “An average restaurant in a good location.

In this thread Andrew Walker goes after Stephen Burtch and then finds himself attacked:

Nan Young Lee
Nan Young Lee
October 20, 2014 9:20 pm

If the hiring of Masai Ujiri and the BMO field expansion are the only highlights of Tim Leiweke’s reign, it might still be worth it.

I wonder if the CFL should have gone to 10 yard end zones instead of the current 20 yards when all the new stadiums got built. It could have had end zome seats closer to the field of play as in the NFl and NCAA for a better fan experience. Some places don’t have end zone seating presumably because of the larger end zones depriving teams of extra and much needed revenue. And an enclosed stadium just looks better. It might be tampering with the history of the game, but do we really need 20 yard end zones?

October 21, 2014 7:59 am

Terrific interview! I can still vividly recall Howard Berger breathlessly reporting the details of the Carter-Alomar trade live from the baseball winter meetings in Louisville.

David Alter is now writing for and

Glad to see that he has landed of his feet.

October 21, 2014 8:31 am

Bill Watters can be heard on Macko and Cauz (TSN 1050 weekdays 9 to noon show). It is a great show and I believe he will be a regular once a week – I suggest you give it a chance. Watters has long time connections to both hosts through their fathers. Bob M. Sr was the PD at the FAN and also 640 when Watters worked at both.

As for Howard, I am not too surprised he hasn’t moved on to other opportunities in broadcasting. He spent far too long doing the same thing for decades. He became stale and the listeners grew tired of him. It was really an entry level reporting job that he clung to as a career – and he did way too much editorializing (as if his opinion mattered) and I found him annoying to listen to, to the point of switching channels when he came on. That job is a “just the facts” reporting job, nothing else.

As for TSN personalities staying put. Why would they leave? They still have lots of hockey to cover and Sportsnet is a joke and always has been. Why work for Sportsnet when the league tells them what they can say and how to say it? Those guys have too much credibility for that…Sure the TSN guys seem to enjoy working together, but they also don’t want to go to an inferior network. They have plenty to cover and Dreger, McKenzie and LeBrun all have 2nd jobs, which only helps their own rep and TSN’s brand.

No one I’ve read or heard has wondered allowed if Bettman’s hatred for ESPN and their ownership position with TSN affected the contract negotiations last year.

Charlie Brown
Charlie Brown
October 21, 2014 4:00 pm

Why did they get rid of Howard? He’d look great as a co-host somewhere in this radio hockey world… especially in the 9-12.

Nan Young Lee
Nan Young Lee
October 22, 2014 12:15 am

Interesting interview with David Branch on 6pm hour of PTS. Brunt was outstanding – politely skeptical and probing.

October 22, 2014 9:31 am

I for one am shocked to hear that Cox is having a hard settling into the role of being a poor man’s Bob MacKenzie. It’s almost as if he’s more of an agitator and less of a credible journalist.

Howard definitely got more opinionated once they reduced his role, and I think his bosses probably didn’t like that. However, as we have now learnt they wanted to axe the position altogether to save money, so it might not have mattered what Howard did in the end.

October 23, 2014 3:25 pm

Credit to Tim/Sid and Davidi for blasting the Jays for raising ticket prices.

October 23, 2014 7:23 pm

@ Nan Young Lee

Good point about Stephen Brunt, who has taken some criticism here lately for too often conforming for the cause. I’ve been among his critics.

But you are so correct … he brought his A-game in that interview with David Branch, who usually gets a free ride on PTS. Brunt held Branch’s feet to the fire, much like CBC Radio’s Matt Galloway did Tuesday morning. Branch is a bit of a media darling in Toronto – he gets a much softer ride there than in smaller markets throughout the province – but he was taken to task this week by some very good Toronto-based journalists.

Sam in Scarb
Sam in Scarb
October 24, 2014 11:15 am

In advance,sorry for the Hi-Jack.
In the past always went to 4-6 Blue jays games a year at SKYDOME.
In 2014 went to 1
To much of a pain in the ass getting there and back home along with the sheer criminal prices charged at the concessions.
Now with the increase in ticket prices for 2015 I will be attending 0 games.
I do not believe I am alone with these thoughts.

October 24, 2014 11:58 am

Listening to Bob lay into fans yesterday for complaining about the Blue Jays ticket price hike made me wonder how many tickets he’s paid for over the decades.

October 24, 2014 12:22 pm

I have to agree with McCown. Fans complaining about ticket prices always sound like people looking for something to complain about. If tickets cost too much for you, then don’t go, or go less often and buy the cheapest seats. The last time Leafs play off tickets were about to go on sale, the same people complaining about the high prices were complaining about how quickly they were sold out a few days later after they went on sale.

Not that it matters, but every time McCown talks about Blue Jays ticket prices, he mistakenly says the top ticket price was $7.50 in 1977. It was only $6.50.

The top price rose from $7 in 1980 to $8 in 1981, which you can see by looking at pocket schedules for sale on eBay.

October 24, 2014 1:30 pm

Those cheap seats (the 500s) are the ones that have been hit the hardest with this increase, so they’re not so cheap anymore.

I don’t know, I think after the disappointment of the last two seasons including all the nonsense of “passing the hat” around for a pitcher and broken promises at the trade deadline, that the fans have a lot to complain about. I also think it’s disingenuous for media personalities (who have never had to buy a ticket) to be critical of fans who do buy tickets. Bob says don’t go to the games if you don’t like to pay more. But then he would be the first to crap on those people who stay at home when the Jays draw flies.

Sorry for the hijack, Mike in B. That was a great interview with Howard.

October 24, 2014 1:45 pm

I don’t even like baseball very much. It’s been years since I watched a game on TV. I went to a game on July 2 simply because it was so cheap — $11 or maybe $13 with service charge? — and because I had the day off and not been to a baseball game or anything else at the dome with the roof open for several years. I sat the first row of the 500 level, which wasn’t a bad seat at all for the price when you consider ticker prices for other events.
I can honestly say it would not have stopped me from going if the price had been 4 or 5 dollars more.

Mike S
Mike S
November 1, 2014 12:43 am

I finally had time to read this interview………..very enjoyable……….I never had a problem with Berger and for the most part I liked his work……….at one point he was on 590 and writing for the National Post and appearing as a guest on Global’s Sportsline………’s hard to believe he is currently pretty much gone from the scene except for his blog

I’m not sure I’m buying the theory that he isn’t working on one of the two Toronto sports radio stations because he has strong opinions (didn’t Toth say the same thing about himself?)…………but Berger definitely ruffled a few feathers over the years………….I still remember when Bill Watters was working for the Leafs and didn’t like something that Berger reported…………he came on 590 as a guest and said this several times in a patronizing way: “Howard’s a good little Leafs fan”

November 26, 2014 5:53 pm

I always liked Howard’s updates on the Leafs and was disappointed when he was let go. I always get in arguments with my hockey buddy friends and used to back up my arguments with things I had heard from Howard. Now I always listen to Leaf lunch on TSN radio. I occasionally have listened to Sportnet’s Hockey Central at noon and Doug McClean is pretty funny at times but Leaf’s Lunch gives a lot more relevant information on everything going on around the league from actual diehard Leaf fans like Bryan Hayes.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x