DM72 Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 The show's too popular for them to take Stephen A off the air. I really don't like Stephen A, but I don't think he said anything to get fired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 The show's too popular for them to take Stephen A off the air. I really don't like Stephen A, but I don't think he said anything to get fired. At what point does its alleged popularity not matter? ESPN is already a network filled with all kinds of conflicts of interests and agendas. It's completely in bed with the three biggest sports leagues and with the NCAA. And that has often called the credibility of its news division into question. Does it really need this open sore of a show on its schedule too? In the grand scheme of ESPN's empire, how much can this ridiculous show airing in the middle of the freaking morning actually make them? Here is a question: Has anyone ever actually sat down and watched an episode of First Take? I've only consumed it in online video clips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM72 Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 I watch it every morning and know plenty of people that do. You think Stephen A's comments would have been that big a deal if no one was watching? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted July 28, 2014 Author Share Posted July 28, 2014 At what point does its alleged popularity not matter? ESPN is already a network filled with all kinds of conflicts of interests and agendas. It's completely in bed with the three biggest sports leagues and with the NCAA. And that has often called the credibility of its news division into question. Does it really need this open sore of a show on its schedule too? In the grand scheme of ESPN's empire, how much can this ridiculous show airing in the middle of the freaking morning actually make them? Here is a question: Has anyone ever actually sat down and watched an episode of First Take? I've only consumed it in online video clips. First Take has been getting criticized for years. Richard Deitsch over at SI has been slamming it constantly. Same with The Big Lead and Deadspin. I honestly don't know anyone who watches it, since most everyone I know is working during the show. Yet somehow, someway, it just keeps on going. There's been plenty written about the show how he some ESPN employees dislike the show. Simmons was suspended for bashing it before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM72 Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 First Take has been getting criticized for years. Richard Deitsch over at SI has been slamming it constantly. Same with The Big Lead and Deadspin. I honestly don't know anyone who watches it, since most everyone I know is working during the show. Yet somehow, someway, it just keeps on going. There's been plenty written about the show how he some ESPN employees dislike the show. Simmons was suspended for bashing it before. Most people DVR shows they might miss. I work nights and if there's a show at night I want to see, I DVR it. And guys, just because you don't watch a show doesn't mean it's not popular. If it wasn't, it would have been off the air years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 First Take has been getting criticized for years. Richard Deitsch over at SI has been slamming it constantly. Same with The Big Lead and Deadspin. I honestly don't know anyone who watches it, since most everyone I know is working during the show. Yet somehow, someway, it just keeps on going. There's been plenty written about the show how he some ESPN employees dislike the show. Simmons was suspended for bashing it before. I think a lot of people at ESPN understand that everyone thinks First Take's "hot sports takes" are just pro wrestling-esque made-up nonsense. And if a show in the middle of your schedule is completely fake, why should we trust anything else? Say what you will about Kornheiser and Wilbon, but no one has ever assumed that they were just faking their opinions on PTI. The premise of that show what that these two dudes have been having these discussions/arguments for 30 years in the newsroom and now it's just on tv. Simmons....Beadle....I think they don't want the stain of First Take on their credibility. And here's the thing that everyone has to know: First Take is not going to go off the air quietly. When it finally gets cancelled, it's going to be the result of some spectacular controversy. It's going to be like Opie and Anthony. I honestly thought this was going to be the end, but maybe the story breaking on a Friday saved it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 Perhaps if he said women had a civic duty to retreat from conflict/danger more of ya would be on board? If she was carrying a gun would it change opinions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM72 Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 I honestly thought this was going to be the end, but maybe the story breaking on a Friday saved it. Did you really think this was gonna be the end? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 Perhaps if he said women had a civic duty to retreat from conflict/danger more of ya would be on board? If she was carrying a gun would it change opinions? I want a tape of you quietly chuckling at these incredible zingers you write. Did you really think this was gonna be the end? I thought this one had a chance. The heat on Goodell over this Rice suspension has been huge and what Smith said was indefensible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 Did you really think this was gonna be the end? Yeah, you have more people rallying to defend Smith than anything else in this thread. You can barely keep with all the rationales for when violence against women is okay... and looking at this instance, continuing the violence past the point of when the woman was unconscious might be okay too. Oh yeah, he gave disclaimer... Violence against women is wrong... now, let me explain when it is justified, how it is acceptable and why so often the woman deserved it and it's her fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 I want a tape of you quietly chuckling at these incredible zingers you write. I'll trade for one of you rolling your eyes and muttering...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM72 Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 I want a tape of you quietly chuckling at these incredible zingers you write. I thought this one had a chance. The heat on Goodell over this Rice suspension has been huge and what Smith said was indefensible. ESPN just recently had "CHRIS BROWN" on the Espy's. Just saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Going Commando Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 This is such a phony and completely made up point to bring up in this conversation. Stephen A. and anyone who thinks he has a point is knowingly or unknowingly working with the assumption that women are dumb and have never thought about this themselves. That they have never for a moment thought that "hey maybe we shouldn't do outright actions like hitting or spitting on a man that might provoke him towards violence". Do these things happen? Sure, there are certainly ratchet women who often act like total idiots. Do the actions of a few of them warrant this being a legitimate conversation point in the debate of domestic violence? Either way, "provocation" is such a vague, nebulous term in this context anyways. In general it's a point that even if valid, is applicable towards both sexes. It's also something most members of both sex realize. Bringing it up in the issue of domestic violence is a pathetic attempt at shifting the dialogue away from the real problem. Agreed on all points. You killed it in this post and I wanted to say what you did, but couldn't find the right words. The point SAS makes is totally obvious and inconsequential. It was just a trumped up controversy to generate buzz for the show. That show is no kind of forum to discuss anything of consequence, much less an issue like domestic violence. You're right, giving disproportionate airtime and discussion to such a made up point makes it seem like it's far more germane to the issue of domestic violence than it really is. It does seem like an attempt to distract focus from the real horrors of domestic violence given the audience for a show like First Take is probably close to 100% male. I heard a story about a woman from New York who had been homeless for about ten years on NPR Morning Edition today. Prior to becoming homeless, she had a job in banking and a husband and son and was seven months pregnant with a second son. One night her husband came home drunk and beat her and threw her off their balcony. She said she survived because there was a lot of snow on the ground and it softened her fall. They performed an emergency c section at the hospital and saved her baby but it stayed in the hospital for months because it was so premature, and she suffered lasting facial and brain injuries and she gets seizures now. After that, she said she basically ended up leaving her kids with her sister and lived on the streets until she got into this housing program that New York is implementing with Medicare money. One incident of horrific domestic violence did so much harm. To that woman and her family. And damage to society as a whole if in nothing more than basic economic terms, because one of the points the NPR segment made came from an expert that estimated the average homeless person in New York cost $56,000 per year in taxpayer money in all kinds of costs, like emergency healthcare, housing, prison costs, etc. To me that's the awful reality of domestic violence worth talking about. Domestic violence is horrific and it's heartbreaking how common it is, and it's a crime that goes unreported the majority of the time. That's our country's actual problem and that should have been the show's message. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 Under what circumstances? What did the woman do? Aren't we projecting guilt on her? Do we know that she acted in a way that would make any reasonable man react in the same manner? This is exactly the problem with the Smith line of thinking. It assumes a degree of guilt on the woman. It may be true, but it may not be. More, was whatever this woman did so egregious an act that it deserved not only only a blow from Rice, but knocking her out and bodily dragging and dumping her body? Remember, as near as we can tell Rice had not a mark on him. Didn't she come out and apologize for the role she played in the incident, and came with her husband to plead to Goodell for a lesser suspension? Without knowing exactly what she did, seems like she feels at least some culpability for her role, whatever that may have been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 Smith apologizes by claiming he mis-spoke when he said the thing that he has often said and then lied about how he has always believed the exact opposite of the thing he said that he has often said. http://deadspin.com/espns-first-take-opens-with-horse****-apology-from-step-1611984786 Waiting for him to now turnaround and say "Now go get your shine box." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsluggo Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 Didn't she come out and apologize for the role she played in the incident, and came with her husband to plead to Goodell for a lesser suspension? Without knowing exactly what she did, seems like she feels at least some culpability for her role, whatever that may have been. or/and.. her own pocketbook ALSO gets hit by the suspension. She is arguing against a reduction of her own income... is that surprising? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted July 28, 2014 Author Share Posted July 28, 2014 or/and.. her own pocketbook ALSO gets hit by the suspension. She is arguing against a reduction of her own income... is that surprising? Lol was gonna say the same thing. I mean if your spouse was about to lose hundreds of thousands of dollars, wouldn't you try to defend them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 Agreed on all points. You killed it in this post and I wanted to say what you did, but couldn't find the right words. The point SAS makes is totally obvious and inconsequential. It was just a trumped up controversy to generate buzz for the show. That show is no kind of forum to discuss anything of consequence, much less an issue like domestic violence. You're right, giving disproportionate airtime and discussion to such a made up point makes it seem like it's far more germane to the issue of domestic violence than it really is. It does seem like an attempt to distract focus from the real horrors of domestic violence given the audience for a show like First Take is probably close to 100% male. I heard a story about a woman from New York who had been homeless for about ten years on NPR Morning Edition today. Prior to becoming homeless, she had a job in banking and a husband and son and was seven months pregnant with a second son. One night her husband came home drunk and beat her and threw her off their balcony. She said she survived because there was a lot of snow on the ground and it softened her fall. They performed an emergency c section at the hospital and saved her baby but it stayed in the hospital for months because it was so premature, and she suffered lasting facial and brain injuries and she gets seizures now. After that, she said she basically ended up leaving her kids with her sister and lived on the streets until she got into this housing program that New York is implementing with Medicare money. One incident of horrific domestic violence did so much harm. To that woman and her family. And damage to society as a whole if in nothing more than basic economic terms, because one of the points the NPR segment made came from an expert that estimated the average homeless person in New York cost $56,000 per year in taxpayer money in all kinds of costs, like emergency healthcare, housing, prison costs, etc. To me that's the awful reality of domestic violence worth talking about. Domestic violence is horrific and it's heartbreaking how common it is, and it's a crime that goes unreported the majority of the time. That's our country's actual problem and that should have been the show's message. I remember reading a statistic that close to 50% of homeless women are victims of domestic abuse with their present condition directly linked to the abuse itself. There are serious, horrifying aspects of domestic abuse. What Stephen A. and his defenders are saying is so utterly pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tay Posted July 29, 2014 Share Posted July 29, 2014 @RavensInsider 15m Stephen A. Smith won't appear on First Take or ESPN Radio for next week, ESPN announced. Smith apologized Mon. for Ray Rice-related comments Ridiculous. There was nothing wrong with what he said. He could have done a better job of clarifying his comments, but if he did that for every comment, they wouldn't finish segments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM72 Posted July 29, 2014 Share Posted July 29, 2014 I'm glad Stephen A has had a mishap. Again, dude comes off as holier than thou at times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ixcuincle Posted July 29, 2014 Share Posted July 29, 2014 There was something wrong with what he said. Even if there wasn't something wrong, in this sensitive culture, and the way Beadle responded, he had to face justice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sticksboi05 Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Thank you TMZ for releasing the truth. That Goodell saw this as a 2-game suspension is despicable. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-OS6MMyhHw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 That sick **** should fry. That is despicable. I usually try to not let an athletes/entertainer's personal life affect what they do professionally but goddamn it, that's crazy bruh. He should be jailed. Of course trash ass Ravens fans will defend him tho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sticksboi05 Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 WTF was the district attorney thinking? We are supposed to be a nation with a legal system that does right by people...an intervention program? That is not justice worth a damn. More proof that if you are rich in this country you are held to a different standard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chew Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 2 games....unreal. I hope he gets boo'd every time he touches the ball for the rest of his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.