| Welcome to the Dr. Drew Message board. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Online Sanctuary forums is members only, you will need to register on the board to view these posts. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| The Poorman, Rikki Rachtman and other LL Co-Hosts..; ...besides Adam Carolla & Ted Stryker. | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Dec 7 2008, 07:05 PM (1,398 Views) | |
| cpompa | Dec 7 2008, 07:05 PM Post #1 |
|
Well children, I'm old enough to have been a LL fan since before the days of the Ace man, maybe that's why I don't hate Stryker. Rachtman was the host when I got onto the show and two of the beauties of loveline are that: A,#1) The subject matter lends itself to really get a beat on the troubles and issues of our times in a way that's not dictated by the hosts or producers but actually the callers and listeners, as well as learning stuff that you didn't even know you needed to know, and... B) You get a guest for (most of the time) 2 whole hours chiming in on these various subjects as opposed to just whatever crappy project they happen to be plugging at the moment, therefore you get a feeling for what they're really like as people. Adam alluded to this on his own show with a hint of nostalgia, where you can't do in-depth interviews on morning radio like you can on LL. And the show's continued popularity assures that interesting guests continue to be booked. So for these two reasons the show's format makes it in a way transcend the co-host (though it certainly needs a co-host, preferably a good one). This being said, each co-host has put his/her own spin on things and if anybody wants to comment anything on the other folks that have sat in the famed second stool at LL as well as any of the quirks, games, guests, topics of each of their eras I think we would all be the richer for it. I think we should include in this the cavalcade of guest/co-hosts that came between Adam and Stryker. Also anybody that people think might work as a co-host. ......Thank you. Edited by cpompa, Dec 7 2008, 07:17 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| bguirk | Dec 7 2008, 10:36 PM Post #2 |
|
I disagree with this. I listened for Adam's entire run and the calls rarely changed. Most of the calls are: 1. I'm having trouble with my parents. 2. I'm 16, female, and can't have an orgasm. 3. Should I have sex with my boyfriend? 4. Is this (sexual behavior or act) Normal? 5. What does (insert drug here) do long term? It's a good host that can take the above and make something more out of it. <i>B) You get a guest for (most of the time) 2 whole hours chiming in on these various subjects as opposed to just whatever crappy project they happen to be plugging at the moment, therefore you get a feeling for what they're really like as people</i> I disagree with this too. Most guests are a pain in the ass. Ann tends to book a bunch of bands who 90% of the time are horrible guests. Then there's the actors that come on that sit there like stones because they don't understand the format. With Adam and Drew at least there was a nice stable of frequent guests to draw on (Kathy Griffin, DAG, Jeff Probst) who seemed to enjoy being there. even if I agreed with your first two points Stryker steps all over the show--his attention span is pretty limited to let any topic develop or go outside of the question being asked. Worst. Host. Ever. They should've brought Rachtman back.
so wait--it needs a co-host but it transcends the need for one? I'm not trying to bust your balls here--but I honestly don't get this point. |
![]() |
|
| Laith | Dec 7 2008, 11:18 PM Post #3 |
|
beaten to death with own skull
|
I'm glad you brought this up, because this is what I always bring up regarding the whole "people hate Stryker because he's not Adam" thing. There were a number of guest hosts who were in the running for being a permanent cohost--they even put up a poll about it on the Loveline website at some point or another. Joel McHale, Patton Oswalt, Bert Kreischner... these guys would've all made great cohosts. Lots of people in the community were rooting for one of them (or even any of them--a lot of people felt that there were numerous choices they could be happy with). Everything seemed perfectly lined up for one worthy successor or another to be the cohost. And then... they dropped the whole thing and picked Stryker instead. And this is the other thing I always bring up regarding this subject: even well before Adam left, a lot of people knew Stryker from the occasions when he subbed for Adam, and a lot of people already didn't like him. There were people who would listen to a Drew-plus-guest show of Loveline, but would turn the radio off if Stryker was on that night. So between the fact that lots of people were open to a new cohost and liked the potential replacements, plus the fact that plenty of people already didn't like Stryker well before Adam left... it's pretty clear to me that it's not because he's "not Adam." |
![]() |
|
| cpompa | Dec 8 2008, 12:41 AM Post #4 |
|
I meant that LL in a way transcends who the co-host is, but not the need for a co-host. If you go back and listen to, say, one of the poorman shows, a lot the questions posed are quite different not because people are any brighter now but maybe becauese of changing concerns. Back in the day (and you will know this, bguirk) women who squirted were mortified by this and now for the most part they're ok with it, also back then the subject of the day was AIDS, people were freaked out by it and Drew really made it his mision to debunk AIDS fact from fiction. Also you might recall a show in the Adam era with some "ecstasy" experts saying it was safe when taken correctly etc. and only had adverse effects when laced with other drugs wich is now pretty well known not to be the case (hell, back in the seventies people said cocaine wasn't addictive). Another formerly popular subject was foreskin reconstruction, now no one gives a rats ass. So yeah concerns have changed. you won't notice it from feb-02 to aug-04 but society changes and I happen to think LL reflects the zeitgeist in a lot of ways. I mean laughs are certainly a good thing but they weren't unique to Adam or his days on loveline; for just laughs there are other shows that probably fit the bill quite nicely. WOW, disagreeing seems to be your strong suit, but I like a lot of guests. I think there are quite a few regulars nowadays, including Joel Mc Hale, Rainn Wilson, Margaret Cho, Seth Green, New York, Lisa Edelstein, Probst, Seth McFarland, Harland Williams, Andy Dick, The Bravery, Linkin Park, The Dudes from System of a Down, Atreyu, Jamie Kennedy etc. look at the guests in a TWO YEAR span of the Carolla era and see how many repeat appearances there are and I think you'll find it's not that much different. There have always been crappy band guests and always will be. But I apreciate that too, one of my favorite shows is the one with those assholes "the Kooks"; THAT was an interesting show with lots of nice conflict. There are A LOT of bands thad I DO NOT like that are guests on loveline but that's the nature of the KROQ beast, my friend, and I just try to make the most of it to see if they have something interesting to say and they sometimes do. Well I've said it elswhere, and this goes for also, when you step into the shoes of a giant like the Ace man you're bound to get dungballs pelted in your direction (you'll get your fair share even if you're the sorry schmoe defending said shoe stepper), also I'll say I didn't like Stryker either at first and later came around; but I think the same of the ACS, at first it drove me into a depression, nowadays it's a lean mean comedy machine and all the better for the various changes that it has undergone. but still I wouldn't like this thread to become another "uhh Stryker blows and Adam rules" soapbox; the point of it was to talk about OTHER eras besides these two. So I didn't mean to sound angry or bitter in my reply's to your reply, bguirk, and if I do, I sincerely apologize. It's just I'd hoped it wouldn't devolve into this tired old debate. Edited by cpompa, Dec 8 2008, 01:06 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| bguirk | Dec 8 2008, 02:55 AM Post #5 |
|
and yet no one who posts against stryker ever pursues that agenda but ironically it's something that Stryker's supporters always read into his detractors comments. I'm personally not pining for Adam to come back (although I would welcome it) and would be fine with a decent co-host or no co-host. You started this thread by addressing us as children and claiming some great perspective /authority because you caught some shows before Adam started and that's why you can maybe tolerate stryker. How nice for for you, but there are a number of us here who have gone to the significant trouble of tracking down pre-Adam shows because we're losers, love the show, and are interested in its evolution. The consensus opinion from people who've done this over at the Loveline Companion isn't that we hate Stryker because he's not Adam it's that we hate him because he's the worst co-host in the history of Loveline with the possible exception of Jim. I'm fine with discussing other possible co-hosts, but the show gets 100% better if you subtract the current one and add no one. I don't appreciate mine and other stryker-haters thoughts on the show being distilled down to "you kids just haven't been listening long enough to appreciate the essence of Loveline so you have no right to hate Stryker." Go listen to any of the guys who had try-outs during the post Adam era and listen to a current Stryker show. What does it say about the current state of the show that any one of those guys who Laith mentioned do a better job on their first or second or third night than Stryker does two years in? They're coasting on the national network that Adam and Drew built and if I were in radio I'd be starting something to compete against them--that's our only hope at this point because stryker isn't going anywhere (except god willing to an AIDS hospice). Edited by bguirk, Dec 8 2008, 06:02 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| plurry | Dec 8 2008, 05:37 AM Post #6 |
![]()
<3
|
i've been into loveline since '96, and was rarely excited about a guest. i tuned in to hear drew and adam talk, not some dork from a sitcom or band that will be toast in 6 months. ratchman is just a notch above stryker IMHO. yes, i have heard several shows from that era. you also lost me with the "children" comment. you're not even two years older than me, buddy. it would have been just as rude if i were to retort, "eff you, ya old blowhard." not that this is my impression after reading your above post.
|
![]() |
|
| bguirk | Dec 8 2008, 06:05 AM Post #7 |
|
I find Ratchman just on the edge of tolerable--and this is from the week or two he subbed for Adam in the 90's and not from the cluster eff of a show he did with A & D. I don't remember enough of the 2-6 shows I caught that he he hosted before Adam came on the scene which is more than can say from the horrible poorman era. I'd prefer no co-host to Ricky, but Ratchman plus Anderson plus Drew is a listenable show to me on most nights. Edited by bguirk, Dec 8 2008, 06:07 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Dusty TheHick | Dec 8 2008, 06:18 AM Post #8 |
|
Forum Schmendrick
|
Yeah, I gotta agree with plurry on this one...especially since you're four years younger than I am, kid. |
![]() |
|
| Becca | Dec 8 2008, 06:46 AM Post #9 |
|
Ordinary Girl
|
I can't really comment about this one for many reasons. I've never heard any other live co-host except for Stryker. It'll be a year in Februrary that I started listening to Loveline. I will say that I did watch the MTV version of Loveline with Adam. Some of the guests have been boring. The better of them keep me into listening. I will listen even when DrDrew's not there. I like the shows more when DrDrew is there. I will say this--DrDrew gets more calls in when Stryker's not there. |
![]() |
|
| Dusty TheHick | Dec 8 2008, 07:02 AM Post #10 |
|
Forum Schmendrick
|
Well, he got more calls in when Adam wasn't there, too...so that's not really a good litmus test. heh |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Loveline · Next Topic » |








6:55 AM Jul 13