JimBoSox9 said:
I agree. A bunch of nerds on a baseball message board mocking other nerdy things? Those things should be embraced.
ESPN Is Pathetic
- Thread starter Lose Remerswaal
- Start date
I agree. A bunch of nerds on a baseball message board mocking other nerdy things? Those things should be embraced.
I actually took a year off and wrote a book about the subculture of professional videogaming. It's semi fascinating, in an oddball kinda way. They have teams, scout their opponents, call "plays" like a football team and compete on stage for thousands in prize money.
The games aren't sports games. The one I focused on was Counter-Strike, a 5-on-5 commando thing. But the dynamic is sports team -- guys getting cut, wanting to be team leader, sulking over their role, switching teams, rivalries, accusations of cheating.
It's sports, not in the dorky supposition that the media always pushes: that their fast reflexes make them "cyber-athletes." I found it's sports-like in the way they behave like teammates.
(Can't speak to games that are 1-on-1. That's probably less interesting to an outside TV viewer, which is where those invested in pro gaming hope this goes. They hope it's the next televised poker. Who'd have thought that would work on TV.)
The games aren't sports games. The one I focused on was Counter-Strike, a 5-on-5 commando thing. But the dynamic is sports team -- guys getting cut, wanting to be team leader, sulking over their role, switching teams, rivalries, accusations of cheating.
It's sports, not in the dorky supposition that the media always pushes: that their fast reflexes make them "cyber-athletes." I found it's sports-like in the way they behave like teammates.
(Can't speak to games that are 1-on-1. That's probably less interesting to an outside TV viewer, which is where those invested in pro gaming hope this goes. They hope it's the next televised poker. Who'd have thought that would work on TV.)
I've found it very easy to bail on SportsCenter lately, since around the time of their redesign. The standing anchors and over-the-top sets are next-level hype factory. And MLB Network kills it at night with live look-ins.
Last night though, with all the games over, I glanced for about 10 seconds at ESPN, long enough to read the list of upcoming topics. A couple away was JETER OWNS INTERLEAGUE. Seriously. The guy was 4 for 12 against Cincinnati with a couple of runs and a couple of RBI. No homers. He didn't even score the run in the walk-off Sunday. That was Ellsbury on a McCann bloop.
In previous interleague games this season, he was 14 for 57 with zero home runs. Which means as of last night, in all interleague games the Yankees have played this season, Derek Jeter has had zero home runs and batted 18 for 69, or a batting average of .261.
JETER OWNS INTERLEAGUE.
Click. That shit is for 15 year olds.
Last night though, with all the games over, I glanced for about 10 seconds at ESPN, long enough to read the list of upcoming topics. A couple away was JETER OWNS INTERLEAGUE. Seriously. The guy was 4 for 12 against Cincinnati with a couple of runs and a couple of RBI. No homers. He didn't even score the run in the walk-off Sunday. That was Ellsbury on a McCann bloop.
In previous interleague games this season, he was 14 for 57 with zero home runs. Which means as of last night, in all interleague games the Yankees have played this season, Derek Jeter has had zero home runs and batted 18 for 69, or a batting average of .261.
JETER OWNS INTERLEAGUE.
Click. That shit is for 15 year olds.
LondonSox said:
I think it's sad that a message board dedicated to hard-core statistics and have always been derided by mainstream media was being "nerds" and "geeks" would feel the need to throw a weak joke about a huge international competition where the competitors are treated like huge celebrities in their native countries.
ESPN promoting "The Body Issue" today with near-naked photos of Venus Williams and Prince Fielder floating around the main page.
Tom Jackson is at Broncos camp this morning and he brought all the pom poms. :barf:
It's late July, in one hour of SportsCenter you saw, at most, 5 minutes of baseball. The rest is NFL training camp. And by NFL coverage, I mean ballwashing the shield at every possible moment.
It's late July, in one hour of SportsCenter you saw, at most, 5 minutes of baseball. The rest is NFL training camp. And by NFL coverage, I mean ballwashing the shield at every possible moment.
I'll give them credit for at least having two links on the homepage to hosts and analysts criticizing the brevity of Rice's suspension.
It's incredible that ESPN employs a man who can't put coherent sentences together, putting the actual content aside for a moment. Then you add in the message, if you can decipher it, and this guy should never be in front of a camera or mic ever again.
Of course, the end result of this will probably be some half-assed statement from ESPN claiming his words were taken out of context, he'll be off the air for a week, and then things will go back to normal.
Of course, the end result of this will probably be some half-assed statement from ESPN claiming his words were taken out of context, he'll be off the air for a week, and then things will go back to normal.
The700Level @The700Level 1m
Stephen A just canceled his call in with @MikeMiss975 and Charles Barkley because ESPN shut him down.
https://twitter.com/The700Level/status/492745047394512897
Stephen A just canceled his call in with @MikeMiss975 and Charles Barkley because ESPN shut him down.
https://twitter.com/The700Level/status/492745047394512897
Yeah, his Twitter explanation was in that queasy, incoherent middle ground between doubling down and walking it back.
It's like the ESPN writers are having some contest to see who can make the dumbest statement this week.
Stephen A Smith 
The breathtaking stupidity of modern American sports coverage really never ever ceases to amaze me.JayMags71 said:
Good fucking riddance. SAS was the bottom of the barrel in every way.
Vandalman said:
This will be a long tweeted message, folks. So please stay with me and let me finish my complete thought before responding...b/c i'm ANNOYED
In discussing the Ray Rice ruling earlier today on @ESPN_FirstTake, me and @RealSkipBayless ventured into discussing domestic violence.
Upon hearing what I had to say, although admitting I could've been more articulate on the matter, let me be clear: I don't understand how on earth someone could interpret that I somehow was saying women are to blame for domestic violence. And when I saw @MichelleDBeadle -- a colleague I have profound respect for -- tweet what she tweeted, enough is enough. Something needs to be said right now.
REPEATEDLY i said: There is absolutely no excuse to put your hands on a women. REPEATEDLY, I said dudes who do that need to be dealt with. REPEATEDLY, I echoed when confronted by it in the past -- when someone was stupid enough to touch a loved one of this man, raised by 4 older sisters, a mom and numerous female relatives and loved ones, that man was dealt with. From that point, I simply asked: now what about the other side.
If a man is pathetic and stupid enough to put his hands on a woman -- which I have NEVER DONE, btw -- of course he needs to pay the price.
Who on earth is denying that? But what about addressing women on how they can help prevent the obvious wrong being done upon them?
In no way was I accusing a women of being wrong. I was simply saying what that preventive measures always need to be addressed because there's only but so much that can be done after the fact....once the damage is already done. Nothing more. My apologies to @MichelleDBeadle
And any woman out there who misconstrued what I said. I have always -- and will always -- find violence against a women every bit as horrific as women, themselves, find it. Always have. Always will, which my personal behavior exemplifies. I'll strive to be more articulate in the future. But be clear, I wasn't BLAMING women for anything. I was simply saying to take all things into consideration for preventative purposes. Period.
You could parody this into the "I'm not racist but..." line of thinking in like 10 minutes, tops.
Stephen A Smith @stephenasmith 2m
My series of tweets a short time ago is not an adequate way to capture my thoughts so I am using a single (cont) http://tl.gd/n_1s2kd5m
twitlonger crashed
My series of tweets a short time ago is not an adequate way to capture my thoughts so I am using a single (cont) http://tl.gd/n_1s2kd5m
twitlonger crashed
An effective way to torture anyone would be to force them to complete a 10 hour car drive with SAS riding shotgun, he makes my ears bleed.
I don't think the people that run ESPN are stupid, I think they know what they have in SAS. I'm in college right now, a lot of people on campus know who SAS is, he is a POPULAR personailty to many casual sports fans. Despite his lack of talent, he supplies something that entertains certain people that someone like Jason Whitlock or a much better talent doesn't.
ESPN basically let SAS say whatever he wanted, no matter how incorrect or stupid it was, SAS said it and not only was he not really reprimanded, it seems like he is encouraged to do so, since he is on all the fucking time. Now that he has said something REALLY stupid, ESPN has nobody to blame but themselves, because they have allowed this guy to be as outlandish as possible.
I don't think the people that run ESPN are stupid, I think they know what they have in SAS. I'm in college right now, a lot of people on campus know who SAS is, he is a POPULAR personailty to many casual sports fans. Despite his lack of talent, he supplies something that entertains certain people that someone like Jason Whitlock or a much better talent doesn't.
ESPN basically let SAS say whatever he wanted, no matter how incorrect or stupid it was, SAS said it and not only was he not really reprimanded, it seems like he is encouraged to do so, since he is on all the fucking time. Now that he has said something REALLY stupid, ESPN has nobody to blame but themselves, because they have allowed this guy to be as outlandish as possible.
Spot on with that last paragraph Kliq. Was thinking that myself--how great it is that the guy who's made a fortune off playing lowest-common-denominator shoutfests got bitten by going too low. He's helped diminish his profession extraordinarily over the years; he's now suffering the downside of doing that.
Thing is... there are so many more professional ways Michelle Beadle could've handled any problems she had with what SAS said.
What a bitch. If she were 15 pounds heavier...
Everyone has to know - in this day and age - if you're ever going to try and address a certain set of topics in any manner other than by parroting an approved list of talking points, no matter how you try and cover yourself with a preamble and disclaimer - there are thousands of people poised at their keyboards ready go into full outrage mode. Every word will be dissected and taken in the worst possible context. It's just reality. Very few possess the juice to ignore this and SAS surely isn't one of those people.
I haven't followed this closely? Do we know the details? They matter.
Were they both wasted? Did she throw her drink... glass... spit... come swinging nails and purse, etc. at his face... and his reaction was an instinctual swing to ward off an attacker? And, maybe her unconsciousness was 95% passed out drunk? Or, did she just disrespect him by spitting on him and he gave her 2 jabs and an uppercut then dragged her home by the hair?
What a bitch. If she were 15 pounds heavier...
Everyone has to know - in this day and age - if you're ever going to try and address a certain set of topics in any manner other than by parroting an approved list of talking points, no matter how you try and cover yourself with a preamble and disclaimer - there are thousands of people poised at their keyboards ready go into full outrage mode. Every word will be dissected and taken in the worst possible context. It's just reality. Very few possess the juice to ignore this and SAS surely isn't one of those people.
I haven't followed this closely? Do we know the details? They matter.
Were they both wasted? Did she throw her drink... glass... spit... come swinging nails and purse, etc. at his face... and his reaction was an instinctual swing to ward off an attacker? And, maybe her unconsciousness was 95% passed out drunk? Or, did she just disrespect him by spitting on him and he gave her 2 jabs and an uppercut then dragged her home by the hair?
I'm serious about Beadle.
It's @#$%ing friday afternoon. Do you know how many people's weekend these 2 idiots are screwing up? If she had a problem with it... call SAS. Talk to him. Maybe tell him how much you disagree and arrange to debate on the air on Monday. If you just can't resist the urge to tweet... then tweet something - professional. You can even hype the monday show. She didn't need to run go active grrrrrrrrl power like some teenager.
They are both dickheads.
It's @#$%ing friday afternoon. Do you know how many people's weekend these 2 idiots are screwing up? If she had a problem with it... call SAS. Talk to him. Maybe tell him how much you disagree and arrange to debate on the air on Monday. If you just can't resist the urge to tweet... then tweet something - professional. You can even hype the monday show. She didn't need to run go active grrrrrrrrl power like some teenager.
They are both dickheads.
The lengths to which some of you will squirm to make these things about anything else is just totally astonishing. Yeah, "grrrrl power," god for-fuckin'-bid.
I'm confused:
1. Which of Beadle's tweets were unprofessional active grrrrrl power? The one where she said "So I was just forced to watch this morning's First Take. A) I'll never feel clean again B) I'm now aware that I can provoke my own beating."?
2. Why is a private communication the only proper response to a widely televised offensive screed? Is that like when Romney said we should only discuss income inequality in "quiet rooms" but not on the campaign trail?
3. What does it being Friday afternoon have to do with anything, and how does this ruin anyone's weekend?
1. Which of Beadle's tweets were unprofessional active grrrrrl power? The one where she said "So I was just forced to watch this morning's First Take. A) I'll never feel clean again B) I'm now aware that I can provoke my own beating."?
2. Why is a private communication the only proper response to a widely televised offensive screed? Is that like when Romney said we should only discuss income inequality in "quiet rooms" but not on the campaign trail?
3. What does it being Friday afternoon have to do with anything, and how does this ruin anyone's weekend?
One thing I will say is that people LOVE to be outraged. I'm not defending SAS, he deserves all his ridicule, but something the public just always loves to do is talk about how outraged they are because of something, it is probably the #1 topic in media is how pissed off people are about something. The Ray Rice story was perfect for that, it became THE news story of the day mainly because people just love to talk about how outraged they were at the weak ruling. Even today, I never go on ESPN.com outside of the occasional score check, but here I am in this thread because people being outraged is just so god damn entertaining.
Call it! 3:17 PST--"people just like being outraged!"
I'll remember this next time you're all in a froth because someone intimated something less-than-fawning about Tom Brady.
I'll remember this next time you're all in a froth because someone intimated something less-than-fawning about Tom Brady.
Outrageous - shockingly bad or excessive.
So, SAS sad something outrageous (negative connotation). When someone in the public says something outrageous, people tend to get outraged. Implying that said outrage for this incident is "manufactured" or "phony" is a weaksauce cop-out.
I can't stand this air of practiced cynicism when people get upset about these things. Anytime someone makes such a post, I assume they're either a poseur or dead inside.
So, SAS sad something outrageous (negative connotation). When someone in the public says something outrageous, people tend to get outraged. Implying that said outrage for this incident is "manufactured" or "phony" is a weaksauce cop-out.
I can't stand this air of practiced cynicism when people get upset about these things. Anytime someone makes such a post, I assume they're either a poseur or dead inside.
BoredViewer said:
Beadle, like SAS, is part of the sports punditry class. It is her job to make public her views on stories in the sports world.
You are literally complaining about her doing her job.
The idea that she should wait until Monday betrays serious ignorance about how the media works these days and what the players have to do to stay relevant. You may not like it--I don't particularly like it--but you're basically just whining about the existence of technology like twitter itself.
JayMags71 said:
The anti-outrage crowd is actually more annoying to me than the faux outrage crowd because the anti-outrage crowd lumps it all together and refuses to make distinctions of those times when outrage is legitimate. Also, they tend to imply that complaints are shrill, when often it is very cool, level headed criticism of something that is, in fact, fucked up.
Kliq said:
It happened on the network, not on the dot-com. Hall of Fame stuff took up most of the dot-com attention today. Someone should edit this thread title, as a majority of the complaints here are about things the poster has seen on TV. As for that post on the previous page, I'm trying to think it's irony or something.