David Stern to Jim Rome: "Do You Still Beat Your Wife?"

[FirstTimer]

He's fucking boring. All he's going to do is ask Stern some soft ass questions. Who wants to listen to Stern ramble on about how good he thinks the NBA is?

Stern is a tool and he can't handle a simple question with a simple answer. Rome's question was totally fair and was not worded poorly. Who cares if he baited him? Stern played right into it and it's completely his own damn fault. Stern's behavior was totally unbecoming of a commissioner of a major sports league.

Yes it was.

The point of the interview or any interview is to get a guy talking. Get insights, etc. A simple yes or no question doesn't do that. It's a fucking stupid question, but I'm not surprised Rome asked it seeing as he's terrible.

Stern's reaction sucked and was unprofessional but Rome's question in general sucked and ran counter to what you should be doing with any interview questions to begin with.

Shit yes he does.

Yes

In all my years of listening to that lame ass I've never heard anything funny.

[Senser81]

He's fucking boring. All he's going to do is ask Stern some soft ass questions. Who wants to listen to Stern ramble on about how good he thinks the NBA is?

Stern is a tool and he can't handle a simple question with a simple answer. Rome's question was totally fair and was not worded poorly. Who cares if he baited him? Stern played right into it and it's completely his own damn fault. Stern's behavior was totally unbecoming of a commissioner of a major sports league.

Thats kind of what I took out of it, too. Rome is just being Rome, but Stern should be held to a higher standard because he is (allegedly) a commissioner of a major sports league. Stern sunk to Rome's level in a way, but thats usually the level Stern is on anyways.

[FirstTimer]

Further, if David Stern thinks that Jim Rome isn't a respectable journalist and he's just going to use his cheap tricks on him, why did he even agree to be on the show to begin with?

No one here is saying Stern isn't an idiot or a slimeball too.

[Senser81]

In all my years of listening to that lame ass I've never heard anything funny.

Not to sound Heelswxman-ish, but Rome used to be much better when he was just on the radio. I remember when University of Minnesota's basketball program was caught doing all kinds of illegal stuff, like having tutors writing term papers for the players. Minnesota's self-imposed penalty on coach Clem Haskins was to issue a "stern reprimand". Rome said "Whoa...better keep Haskins away from any sharp objects..."

Funny.

[spiker]

Yes it was.

The point of the interview or any interview is to get a guy talking. Get insights, etc. A simple yes or no question doesn't do that. It's a fucking stupid question, but I'm not surprised Rome asked it seeing as he's terrible.

Stern's reaction sucked and was unprofessional but Rome's question in general sucked and ran counter to what you should be doing with any interview questions to begin with.

How was it worded poorly? It was worded so that he could safely answer "No" and explain the safeguards that insures the process is untainted. Stern took the bait and reacted like a child.

[Warner2BruceTD]

Rome positives: He is one of the few radio personalities who will give you an unfiltered, honest opinion. He plays no favorites and will not hesitate to rip anybody if he thinks they deserve it. And unlike a guy like Colin Cowherd, who is essentially a real life troll, always has an angle, isn't really interested in sports, and does whatever is best for his ratings (including taking fake stances and making dishonest statements to rile up the listeners), Rome is genuine. Rome has cultivated a very smooth image and is really a brilliant guy.

Rome negatives: He's not 26 anymore, and shit like "The Smack Off" is easily the worst week or radio in america. Sometimes he overdoes shtick.

Comparing Rome to Cowherd again, Rome has willingly left ESPN twice, despite the fact that in both cases, it resulted in less exposure. He has also never brought his radio show to ESPN, where radio hosts have no creative freedom, are told what topics to discuss, and are encouraged to never take phone calls. So Rome has some professional pride and has become very rich at the same time while sticking to his own personal vision.

Cowherd, on the other hand, will never leave ESPN unless ESPN in no longer #1. Cowherd does whatever is best for his exposure. Jim Rome would never do shallow, vacant shit like 'Sports Nation'. Cowherd readily admits on the air he doesn't have time in his life to watch games. He only watches "big events", and is the perfect ESPN type puppet, because he comes on the air and only talks about the Heat, Tiger Woods, the NFL, and the Yankees.

I do a ton of driving, and Rome is far from my favorite sports radio talkie (I prefer the style of Mike Francesa, or my personal favorite, Chris Russo), but when the shtick is minimized he is one of the best, and I have a ton of respect for his path.

[ralaw]

I can't stand Rome. I never understood the humor in his radio show with those idiot "Clones" calling in and making retarded inside jokes. The show was horrible. The only humor I find in Rome is when Frank Caliendo is doing his Rome impersonation.

Stephen A Smith has become a caricature......I use to like him, but he's pretty bad now.

[Bomberooski]

In all my years of listening to that lame ass I've never heard anything funny.

Then you need to listen more. I'll get you my Jungle Insider info.

[FirstTimer]

How was it worded poorly? It was worded so that he could safely answer "No" and explain the safeguards that insures the process is untainted. Stern took the bait and reacted like a child.

It's not an open ended question by design. In an interview "yes/no" questions are fucking stupid. Especially in radio where you are trying to fill time with live content.

[FirstTimer]

Then you need to listen more. I'll get you my Jungle Insider info.

I'd rather read nothing but posts from ZB for a week.

[Warner2BruceTD]

Rome has a sense of humor?

Rome is very clever and pretty damn funny. It's not everybody's cup of tea, but what is?

[Bomberooski]

Rome positives: He is one of the few radio personalities who will give you an unfiltered, honest opinion. He plays no favorites and will not hesitate to rip anybody if he thinks they deserve it. And unlike a guy like Colin Cowherd, who is essentially a real life troll, always has an angle, isn't really interested in sports, and does whatever is best for his ratings (including taking fake stances and making dishonest statements to rile up the listeners), Rome is genuine. Rome has cultivated a very smooth image and is really a brilliant guy.

Rome negatives: He's not 26 anymore, and shit like "The Smack Off" is easily the worst week or radio in america. Sometimes he overdoes shtick.

Comparing Rome to Cowherd again, Rome has willingly left ESPN twice, despite the fact that in both cases, it resulted in less exposure. He has also never brought his radio show to ESPN, where radio hosts have no creative freedom, are told what topics to discuss, and are encouraged to never take phone calls. So Rome has some professional pride and has become very rich at the same time while sticking to his own personal vision.

Cowherd, on the other hand, will never leave ESPN unless ESPN in no longer #1. Cowherd does whatever is best for his exposure. Jim Rome would never do shallow, vacant shit like 'Sports Nation'. Cowherd readily admits on the air he doesn't have time in his life to watch games. He only watches "big events", and is the perfect ESPN type puppet, because he comes on the air and only talks about the Heat, Tiger Woods, the NFL, and the Yankees.

I do a ton of driving, and Rome is far from my favorite sports radio talkie (I prefer the style of Mike Francesa, or my personal favorite, Chris Russo), but when the shtick is minimized he is one of the best, and I have a ton of respect for his path.

That's good stuff is what that is.


I really truly believe a LOT of people haven't listened to Jim Rome in years. His show is completely different now and although I was a sucker for all the schtick and cheesy "retarded" phone calls I do still enjoy him as his show ages.

[FirstTimer]

Rome positives: He is one of the few radio personalities who will give you an unfiltered, honest opinion. He plays no favorites and will not hesitate to rip anybody if he thinks they deserve it. And unlike a guy like Colin Cowherd, who is essentially a real life troll, always has an angle, isn't really interested in sports, and does whatever is best for his ratings (including taking fake stances and making dishonest statements to rile up the listeners), Rome is genuine. Rome has cultivated a very smooth image and is really a brilliant guy.

Rome negatives: He's not 26 anymore, and shit like "The Smack Off" is easily the worst week or radio in america. Sometimes he overdoes shtick.

Comparing Rome to Cowherd again, Rome has willingly left ESPN twice, despite the fact that in both cases, it resulted in less exposure. He has also never brought his radio show to ESPN, where radio hosts have no creative freedom, are told what topics to discuss, and are encouraged to never take phone calls. So Rome has some professional pride and has become very rich at the same time while sticking to his own personal vision.

Cowherd, on the other hand, will never leave ESPN unless ESPN in no longer #1. Cowherd does whatever is best for his exposure. Jim Rome would never do shallow, vacant shit like 'Sports Nation'. Cowherd readily admits on the air he doesn't have time in his life to watch games. He only watches "big events", and is the perfect ESPN type puppet, because he comes on the air and only talks about the Heat, Tiger Woods, the NFL, and the Yankees.

I do a ton of driving, and Rome is far from my favorite sports radio talkie (I prefer the style of Mike Francesa, or my personal favorite, Chris Russo), but when the shtick is minimized he is one of the best, and I have a ton of respect for his path.

No offense, but if Rome's biggest plus is that he's "better than Cowherd".

Meh.

Rome is lame and annoying to me. Every time I tune into his show I'm bored to tears within an hour, get no entertainment value out of it and find nothing he says to be "clever" or funny

[Warner2BruceTD]

It's not an open ended question by design. In an interview "yes/no" questions are fucking stupid. Especially in radio where you are trying to fill time with live content.

You can attack the way he asked the question if you want, but if you have David Stern on your show this week, and you don't bring up the lottery and the aura of suspicion around it, you are a terrible interviewer and should find something else to do.

Nobody cares about "Mr. Stern, break down the matchup we have here in the Finals". Please. You need to ask about the lottery, you need to ask about the Seattle situation, and if he hadn't been on my show since it happened, you need to ask about the Artest suspension and why he ruled the way he did which allowed Artest to return for Game 7.

[spiker]

It's not an open ended question by design. In an interview "yes/no" questions are fucking stupid. Especially in radio where you are trying to fill time with live content.

That's not what I meant. I meant that the question is wordly "fairly" in that it wasn't a loaded question like Stern implied. It certainly didn't illicit the response question that Stern used to try and prove whatever point he was trying to make. It may have been a yes/no question but since it is an interview, there's always room for follow up questions or probing if Stern decided to be curt. A lot of interviewers make the mistake of asking yes/no questions but they expect follow up or discussion afterwards. I'm sure Steven A. Smith even does it.