Fantasy Phenom Semifinalist Videos, Week 2 (2)

Round 2 of WFAN’s Fantasy Phenom contest was in full effect this past Wednesday at the Stamford, Connecticut Buffalo Wild Wings.

Each semifinalist was given 2 minutes to rant about a chosen topic. One lucky contestant from this group will be chosen to participate in the Fantasy Phenom final round on August 27th at Bar A.

Watch the videos:

Nick-Missed Opportunities for the Mets

Mike – Longevity of Running Backs

John-The Slap in the Face Known as Isiah

Steve – Fewell Has No Excuses

Edward – The Thrill of Chasing Records

Samuel – Don’t Drink the Koolaid Just Yet

Scott – Giants Flying Under the Radar

Howard – NFL News and Notes

Patrick – The Biggest Loser

John – The Three Ring Circus at MSG


One Comment

  1. Cliff says:

    Nick actually in my opinion discusses what is most relevant. He talks about the 800 pound gorilla in the room (the mets financial situation) that people are living in denial about. And it does matter, for the Met fan who has been living in agony for half a decade. Admitting the problem is the first step to fixing it for the Metropolitans. I enjoyed Mike and John’s performances too but they both seem to lag at certain points.

  2. Aaron says:

    You people are beyond embarrassing with your petty and vindictive comments about each other. First of all, a rant is no more than a genuine statement of one’s feelings on a particular topic. It doesn’t have to fit a particular mold. The most important factors the judges will look for here will be presence, diction, voice projection, passion, and intelligence. If any one of these guys didn’t know a ton about sports, he wouldn’t have made it through the sports trivia round. And he probably would’ve been embarrassed on stage like Howard. Lastly, don’t think the judges aren’t watching these performances and thinking more than just radio . Everything in media is multilateral these days. You have the YES Network, and SNY, and the Internet, etc….It’s all about marketability. The advertisers pay the bills.

    1. Hank says:

      Aaron, make some sense. If Howard made it to the second round, how are these other guys any special? You can get the trivia questions wrong and still get to do your rant. It’s happened. And no, these people aren’t going to become a face on the YES network, or SNY. How many of them even have a broadcasting or communications degree? All of a sudden winning a competition with a terrible judging criteria makes these people have a better chance of getting on TV now over qualified people? Wow. Get a clue.

  3. Jeff says:

    to me i think john was the best. i disagree when you say mike was good because i found his voice very fake. yes his voice sounds like a radio voice but its too staged. definitely do not advance mike to the finals he sounds like a whiney teenage boy. john all the way!!

  4. Evan says:

    Howard is great! It’s gonna be awesome listening to dead air when he flips through his paper! Oh yeah, Nick Golden is terrible. What a tool.

  5. Mouth of the South says:

    Id like to thank everyone for posting their opinions!! It really means a lot to me that you guys leave commentary on my work and im sure the others feel the same. Whether its positive or negative, I enjoy reading what you guys think because it gives me either confidence to go forward, or things that I need to work on. You guys are great and I hope you stay tuned into the contest to see who wins. Thanks again

    John “Mouth of the South” Schiavone

  6. SportyGal12 says:

    Ya know.. it has little do to with video presence or how they look .. its all about sound .. they will be on the air and if you want my honest opinion.. I really think Scott sounds great. His points were all on and facts were straight. There were a couple on here that didnt even have their facts straight.

  7. john says:

    It should come down to John and Steve. Nick is a close third, but didn’t u get the idea that he doesn’t know rnough sports to last an entire show Based on both of his rants they were generic instead of intuitive. John and Steve were most entertaining and enjoysble to listen to.

  8. Dane from Bk says:

    It’s really hard to tell who would host a good show just based on a 2 minute rant. I’m sure a station like WFAN put these guys on the spot a little to see what they’re really made of. Would be fun to see how that unfolded.

  9. Janet Hauck says:

    Most of these are pretty awful, especially the ones toward the bottom

  10. Alvin A. says:

    Nick because somehow he’s the most marketable AND the most original. Good look, good thoughts, good sound. Mike was good too, but I did get a little bored during his rant.

  11. Christopher says:

    Mike looked a little nervous up there and rambled…Who cares about “running back shelf lives” right now anyway?

  12. Kevin Jakos II says:

    It’s weird I actually think the first four are the best, in that order. Nick seems like the smartest, had the best content, and was the most passionate without going stupid crazy. Mike has the best traditional radio voice. John has a cool little Dick Vitale energy going on but it might get annoying. Steve was personable and made a few good points but I couldn’t picture him hosting a show. You guys are right though-when it’s all said and done, these posts won’t and shouldn’t mean a thing.

  13. vincent Manning says:

    mike i felt put out a great display of what a host should sound like. seemed like a seasoned vet out there. Love the topic he chose< how many times can we hear rants about why the mets suck. he was an original send him tio the finalssssssssssss

  14. Dustin says:

    Whats with the lack of love for Patrick? Dude did his thing and then some, he did a heck of alot better then Nick. John was also great but I could see listeners starting to get annoyed with him.

  15. Captain Obvious says:

    You guys need to get a life! It’s so obvious that the same 3 people have written 95% of these fake posts. These comments mean nothing until they make you actually register before posting. Even then, WFAN management will make decisions on what they think, not what a bunch of fake, anonymous posts say.

  16. Kevin says:

    Steve for sure! Knowledge, intellect and personality. End of story.

  17. Joe says:

    Steve was by far the most knowlegable of these takes. Although smooth, felt like Nick was lecturing me on a memorized speech and I bet if you ask him what obs and slugging pct is he wouldnt have a clue.

  18. PNTM says:

    I can’t believe this is a contest. Three Ring Circus is a honest take on what is going on. That is what Sports News should be. The facts, the anger, the delivery. If you have a problem with John, you have a problem with the New York attitude.

  19. Stann Smith says:

    LOL John’s Rant (The Three Circus) Was Hilarious and So True. I never knew that Isaiah Thomas resigned To The Knicks. That is SAD.

  20. Allyson says:

    I really have to say that John’s rant (The Three Ring Circus) caught my attention right away. He brings you back to reality with his loud, boisterous voice and personality. He can definitely bring something new to the table. I would definitely like to hear him on WFAN every week!

  21. Adam K says:

    Steve! Championship!

  22. Terry Bonski says:

    It’s time get John a muzzle, a Valium, and a box of Just for Men . . . the middle school cafeteria highlight dye job is ridiculous . . . grow up. Although it could make for tremendous fun just calling in to make fun of him . . .

  23. CMAC says:

    Steve kept you entertained with his comical analogies and aphorisms. When listening to talk radio, its all about knowledge and entertainment. Steve, above and beyond the rest, had both.

  24. Serie says:

    Steve was undoubtedly the most dominant. His Giants take was dead on and it isn’t even his team! Busting on the Mutts and Knicks is as easy as it comes.
    Nick has a good delivery but sounds just like that red headed clown Evan Roberts. The last thing WFAN needs is another whining yenta “ranting” about how “his” team puts him through misery.

  25. Paul D. says:

    Steve was terrific. I remember him from Sirius, and he can carry a show. I could listen to him talk sports for hours. Much better than the others. I think he’s the clear favorite in this group.

  26. Terry Bonski says:

    Steve knew what he was talking about- plain and simple. By far the best one- knowledgeable, genuine, and a guy I would listen to. Nick talked great, sounded great, but knew nothing of what he was talking about. It was garbage in a nice bag . . . Mets were too cheap for Bengie Molina?? Really?!?!?!? They offered him the largest contract he was offered in 2006, AND this past offseason- both times he ended up taking lesser offers somewhere else. There’s plenty of reasons to kill the Mets . . . it takes a bad kind of talent to be wrong about a Mets screw up . . . take a lap Nick- and go home PLEASE!!

    1. Franklin says:

      Good call on Nick, Terry. If you saw his first video, it’s was an insult to people who pay to see the games. He said it’s ok for the Yankees to spend through the roof, like it has no affect on ticket prices and concessions. He has no clue about sports. He would get permmabanned from calling any show. I’m not even gonna praise anyone else because that’s how bad Nick was. I can care less who wins, as long as it’s not Nick. A total waste if you ask me. Utterly clueless.

  27. Joey says:

    Looks like Nick got his friends on here to boost his (SLIM) chances. Same goes for the “wanna be mad dog” John yelling mouth of the south non stop. Patrick and Howard were so bad it was entertaining. Like watching someone bomb at standup comedy.

    Give Steve,Edward, Scott, and Mike a chance. They were the only ones tolerable.

  28. Tubs Macgruby says:

    I freaking think John is amazing his level of passion a hundred and fifty percent.You can tell he really believes what he is talking about he backs up his words with a booming voice.I hope John goes all the way cause I wanna see what else this guy got in him I think he still has more to show us when it comes to setting the tone and letting his opinion be heard.
    Johns rant was prefect it was loud so it woke you up cause the other rants sounded like telemarketers.John sets the mood and use’s the prefect tone like a prefect first date I hope to see him in the finals to see what else he got left in him.

  29. Big John says:

    Mike’s rant was the only one that had me interested from start to finish, we’ve all heard the same chatter with the other rants time and time again at least Mike’s topic on running backs was creative, I’m always interested in something different.

  30. Playground Psychotic says:

    The Mouth of the South sounds so refreshing, especially when compared to the other contestants. What allows him to grab the room is that all of his points are backed in research, rather than (what most of the other contestants use) “I think” or “I say”, which makes his arguments more believable and allows for greater listenership. While he’s aggressive and intense (great for radio!) his intensity isn’t blinded by ignorance and/or opinion.

  31. Derek says:

    Was that Howard guy serious? He was god awful, reading off paper LAME !

  32. Alex says:

    John was diffrent but showed alot of passion and i liked that, He reminded me alot of Max Kellerman. But I felt that the best over all was Patrick and the biggest loser, showed passion, smarts and was also comical. The two of them stood out the most, but I felt Patrick was better all around.

  33. Vincent C. says:

    I actually went to the event because I live in Stamford, and Ncik completely blew the others away with how he handled the before and after questioning. His rant was the best too I think. Depends on what WFAN wants really…

  34. Kevin Silva says:

    These forums are a joke. Anonymous postings by anonymous idiots hahaha…First guy was the best though, I do agree there

  35. Rodrick says:

    First guy was the best. I reallly got into what he was saying and believed him.

  36. Jeremy says:


  37. Johnny says:

    Here is the reason why Nick was THREE cuts better than the rest: He was the only one who truly editorialized…He had an idea and went somewhere with it with his own points, his own story, and his own sense of what was going on.

  38. L.C. Banks says:

    Nick was the best. He was the only one who went outside the box in his thinking. Everyone else just presented us with stuff we already know.

  39. Kim says:

    Nick. Not even close. He stole the show

  40. Henry J. says:

    Dead on brother. The man was locked in and made a lot of sense.

  41. Phil says:

    Are you guys crazy? Nick was the best by a mile! I’d be surprised if he didn’t win the whole thing.

  42. Paul C. says:

    Wow. I couldn’t disagree with you first guys more. Nick is the most passionate and articulate voice in this entire contest so far. Seems like the total package to me. The naysayers are probably just bitter competitors who realize that he took them to school.

  43. Phil says:

    So we all agree that Howard or Patrick are battling for last ?

  44. Rick says:

    I thought Scott was OK, but Steve’s rant on the Giants had much more in depth analysis. He combined some personality along with the substance and was probably the strongest overall. Anyone can just rant about a topic you have already heard someone else say on the radio, but to back it up with real knowledge of a sport is tough to do.

    1. Peter Griffin says:

      What personality did you see in Steve’s rant? The Fredo comment? C’mon. Gimme a break. Not original.

      What substance? Wishful thinking that the Giants D can create mismatches? C’mon. Gimme a break. Bullocks an old man, and the Cardinals were trying everything to get something out of Rolle until they gave up and finally cut him.

      If the FAN is looking to turn it’s programming into a chronic whining station, these guys complaining about the Knicks, Mets and Giants is the way to go. However, we already get that from callers. I’d rather have the host put these people in their place and get a much due reality check. Instead, most of these contestants need THAT reality check and will never be able to put anyone in their place because they have no original thoughts on sports, and are clueless on addressing any issues. Name dropping and throwing what ifs, is not impressive. It’s straight out of an amateur’s playbook.

      Only one person talked sports philosophy and strategy, Mike. It wasn’t a hot topic, but definitely a subject to display knowledge and understanding of sports.

  45. Bobby says:

    Personally I think Scott did a nice job talking about the Giants. As a Giants fan I haven’t heard a thing about the Giants since camp opened. This is the same team that was 5-0 to start the season last year. Things happened and they were a disgrace in the last two games of the year. He is right when he says that the Jets are the sexy team in NY but who would have an easier road to the Super Bowl. The NFC is clearly the easier road if you ask me. The Offense is legit and the defense is revamped so I think he made a very good point.

  46. RadioFan says:

    Oops, didn’t realize there was more than one John in the mix. I was talking about the Three Ring Circus guy. Plus I agree, MSG is a total circus.

  47. RadioFan says:

    I don’t know, I think I like more energy and passion in the hosts that I listen to. Otherwise everything just fades into the generic talk background and it becomes like white noise; something you can just tune out. John definitely woke me up, I have to say, and I think I like it! He doesn’t sound like anything generic that’s for sure.

  48. Stevie D says:

    I believe I fell asleep during Nick’s rant as well. He could have easily summed that up with two words, “mets suck”.

    Some of these men were horrible and I couldn’t even understand Howie. And why was he reading of a piece of paper, that was terrible!

    You can really tell who would sound good on the radio and who wouldn’t. Steve and Mike were pretty good in what they said. I think Edward was the most unique and made the most interesting point though He showed the most knowledge and didn’t like these other guys. Some of them just yell to get their point across. Don’t they know WFAN did away with the Maddog for a reason.

  49. Vince B says:

    I think I fell asleep during Nick’s rant, I still don’t know what it’s about except telling us what we already know, the Mets suck.

    You got another guy spitting into the mic about the NFL. I can’t even hear what he said, and they even got his name wrong. Is it Thomas or Howard? Guess he ain’t winning lol He does have a great voice for calling horses down at the track.

    John himself is a three ring circus. I never though the circus could be so boring.

    This week has it’s token Giants fan, but there ain’t gonna be anyone talking about them this year because they’re a last place team and their best player is in prison.

    The guy talking about RBs knew his stuff and can’t say anything bad about him. He actually made a point unlike everyone else who just wants to complain about their team. That’s rare. I wonder if the contest with add points for being unique, yet truthful. Advance Mike so I don’t have to hear a disgruntled fan hosting his own show!

Comments are closed.

More From CBS New York

Get Our Morning Briefs

Watch & Listen LIVE