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

[Bomberooski]

I'm not blaming Rome for Stern's reaction. I've already said Stern is a fucking slimeball and a jerk. I'm just saying Rome asked a question in a stupid way.

THIS is your problem. You are not the "Queen of Questions" no matter how hard you strive to be her. It should read: "I'm just saying Rome asked the question in a way that I find stupid."

Quit acting like the Clones you hate so much.

 

[FirstTimer]

THIS is your problem. You are not the "Queen of Questions" no matter how hard you strive to be her.

Very true. I'm already the king.

:smug:


Rome is and always has been shit and asked a poorly formed question.

Stern is and always has been a complete assbag.

Perfect storm.

 

[Senser81]

I don't have a problem with the framing of the question. In fact, it couldn't have been more direct. None of this dancing around that some guys like to do "Um, sir, some people say that the draft may not be totally and completely legit, and that the league might sometimes do things to influence the outcome...". None of that bs. IS THE DRAFT RIGGED? Stern could have handled it one way and came off great. Instead he came off hyper sensitive. I'm being open minded here, but I can't find a way to pin blame on Rome in this situation.

I'm not blaming Rome, but Rome should expect that Stern would answer in an asshole-ish way, because thats how Rome asked the question (and I think Rome WANTED Stern to answer in an asshole-ish way). Its like when I create a thread titled "Is Zoneblitz like jock itch?", I should be in full expectation that Zoneblitz will immediately groan me. If Rome actually wanted a discussable answer from Stern, he should have phrased the question differently. My issue is that Rome got upset and pouty at Stern, when all Stern did was reply the way Rome wanted him to reply based on the question (if that makes sense).

 

[RosettaStoned]

I think Rome is hilarious personally.

 

[Bomberooski]

I'm not blaming Rome, but Rome should expect that Stern would answer in an asshole-ish way, because thats how Rome asked the question (and I think Rome WANTED Stern to answer in an asshole-ish way). Its like when I create a thread titled "Is Zoneblitz like jock itch?", I should be in full expectation that Zoneblitz will immediately groan me. If Rome actually wanted a discussable answer from Stern, he should have phrased the question differently. My issue is that Rome got upset and pouty at Stern, when all Stern did was reply the way Rome wanted him to reply based on the question (if that makes sense).

And all of this is after Rome tried to just brush off a "Do you still beat your wife" comment by Stern.

 

[Senser81]

And all of this is after Rome tried to just brush off a "Do you still beat your wife" comment by Stern.

Rome easily brushed off that comment, but got upset when Stern said "Are you going to hang up on me?". Kind of funny in its own way.

 

[Bomberooski]

Rome easily brushed off that comment, but got upset when Stern said "Are you going to hang up on me?". Kind of funny in its own way.

Because like anyone it gets harder and harder not to snap on someone when they keep going at you.

 

[ralaw]

I don't listen to Rome's show, but I do listen to Cowherd and when Stern comes on they have a tick for tack type of conversation, but it's generally in jest. Are Rome and Stern like this as well? If so, I can understand why Rome asked the question in the way he did and I can understand why Stern responded the way he did. The funny part was the Rome didn't even take offense to Stern's "beat your wife" comment, but instead he took offense to Stern accusing him of making a career of "cheap thrills". Sensitive topic? :kobe:

 

[Bomberooski]

I don't listen to Rome's show, but I do listen to Cowherd and when Stern comes on they have a tick for tack type of conversation, but it's generally in jest. Are Rome and Stern like this as well? If so, I can understand why Rome asked the question in the way he did and I can understand why Stern responded the way he did. The funny part was the Rome didn't even take offense to Stern's "beat your wife" comment, but instead he took offense to Stern accusing him of making a career of "cheap thrills".

Rome and Stern are normally pretty buddy buddy. This is the first time they've got into it.

 

[spiker]

The funny part was the Rome didn't even take offense to Stern's "beat your wife" comment, but instead he took offense to Stern accusing him of making a career of "cheap thrills". Sensetive topic? :kobe:

It became personal when Stern said he makes a living off of cheap tricks. That's why Rome said that he took offense to that.

 

[Rayman]

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.

I don't think you understand.

If I could thank this post 100x, I would.

 

[ram29jackson]

Romes callers and the stupid "your take " junk is childish and dumb. When he repeats the same thing over and over , thats freaking stupid and I have to wonder why he hasnt finally gotten rid of that? Playing sound bites that are a decade old gets annoying. But he seems to have a rapor with the professional athletes in the world and he has decent interviews here and there and sometimes he hits a great monologue. But half the time I want him to shut up...and he still has a problem with dead air gaps too LOL

this was bound to happen...an annoying radio guy and a old cranky man both proud and self rightious and self absorbed.

 

[Herm]

I havent listened to rome much in about 5 years (since he went to god awful AM in my market) but he was by far the funniest of the sports guys on the radio.

 

[SethMode]

I don't listen to Rome's show, but I do listen to Cowherd and when Stern comes on they have a tick for tack type of conversation, but it's generally in jest. Are Rome and Stern like this as well? If so, I can understand why Rome asked the question in the way he did and I can understand why Stern responded the way he did. The funny part was the Rome didn't even take offense to Stern's "beat your wife" comment, but instead he took offense to Stern accusing him of making a career of "cheap thrills". Sensetive topic? :kobe:

Couldn't help myself: "tick for tack?"

I don't hate Rome because I don't listen to Rome really, but having read through this thread I think that Senser has the most accurate perspective. Rome tried to get a rise out of Stern, Stern responded in kind (and at first I thought that was pretty brilliant on Rome's part if it was his intention -- that was about the BEST response he could get from that question in terms of admitting any guilt), and then for some reason it turned into a cat fight. I for one don't understand why Rome got remotely upset, and I'm not buying Bomber's reasoning of "well everyone breaks eventually". If that's the case, you aren't making a good argument for Rome's professionalism.

 

[Bomberooski]

Couldn't help myself: "tick for tack?"

I don't hate Rome because I don't listen to Rome really, but having read through this thread I think that Senser has the most accurate perspective. Rome tried to get a rise out of Stern, Stern responded in kind (and at first I thought that was pretty brilliant on Rome's part if it was his intention -- that was about the BEST response he could get from that question in terms of admitting any guilt), and then for some reason it turned into a cat fight. I for one don't understand why Rome got remotely upset, and I'm not buying Bomber's reasoning of "well everyone breaks eventually". If that's the case, you aren't making a good argument for Rome's professionalism.

I guess if someone said "Do you still beat your girlfriend" to me that would cross a line of just ribbing each other and trying to get under someones skin. Then to challenge your professionalism on top of it it just builds. Once you cross a line into something real personal the conversation becomes a lot more tender (gay gay word choice I realize)

 

[ram29jackson]

BiggaAdams must be one of those dweebs that tries to call Rome with some dumb "Take that doesnt suck"

 

[SethMode]

I guess if someone said "Do you still beat your girlfriend" to me that would cross a line of just ribbing each other and trying to get under someones skin. Then to challenge your professionalism on top of it it just builds. Once you cross a line into something real personal the conversation becomes a lot more tender (gay gay word choice I realize)

Eh, I think that Rome is smart enough to know that Stern wasn't actually insinuating that he beats his wife. He didn't start to pout until after the professionalism comment, but I see that as making even less sense. Who gives a fuck about what David Stern thinks? You'd think that Rome didn't, because he asked that question to him, but yet, apparently, he does?

 

[spiker]

Guys, he wasn't literally asking Rome if he still beats his wife.

 

[MattD56]

Guys, he wasn't literally asking Rome if he still beats his wife.

shhhhhh

 

[Champ]

Im not trying to read the entire thread did anyone bring up that "Do You Still Beat Your Wife?" is an old lawyers joke?