"The NBA Will Be Better Off Without Stephen A. Smith" - Jon Lewis

[Tribal Outkast]

to you

"Entertaining" is subjective, but the numbers don't lie. And you can bet ESPN has the metrics to back up his value, hence his new deal. Whether tv ratings, his name trending on social media for something new and ridiculous he's said and done, his pod numbers, people imitating his antics, all of that shyt.

know what you saying, and there's a lot of people I don't get the appeal of, but they draw

People should know how this works now. They keep saying “tv is dead” and social media/streaming is the wave, well Stephen A is a guy that’s liked, mocked, meme’d to death, etc. people swear SAS is losing when people “check” him or whatever. He wins even when it looks like he’s losing cause people can’t seem to stop talking about him. You can literally use the energy you have talking about SAS to elevate actual journalists that you do like. I can’t name one person from that network off the top of my head that actually gives us true journalism and people love them universally for it. I know SAS, Pat Macafee, and Kendrick Perkins though. All wack ass entertainers.

 

[UpNext]

I agree with the article but ultimately he isn't going anywhere because his following is too big. Short of catching this dude in some scandalous activities outside of work, nothing you can really do about it but just not legally watch anything with him in it.

 

[Red Money]

He's not entertaining though he's amazingly corny...

I've never seen someone on their own dikk like this fool

He thinks the yelling he does is his schtick and is charming..

Them crackers that he works for at ESPN think "he's a real black man" though

Last night during draft coverage I muted my TV every single time he opened his mouth

Imo Stephen A was entertaining up until 2016 then he became a self aware caricature hamming it up for the camera.

Then I started watching undisputed in 2019 and Shannon Sharpe had the juice Stephen A used to process. But Shannon is going to overdo it .. and has overdone it like Stephen A.


I give Charles Barkley Credit...he didn't play into hamming it up for the cameras...he still flow like 2005.

 

[Rekkapryde]

Imo Stephen A was entertaining up until 2016 then he became a self aware caricature hamming it up for the camera.

Then I started watching undisputed in 2019 and Shannon Sharpe had the juice Stephen A used to process. But Shannon is going to overdo it .. and has overdone it like Stephen A.


I give Charles Barkley Credit...he didn't play into hamming it up for the cameras...he still flow like 2005.

Charles ain't actin. He's authentic. Good or bad.

SAS is playing it up. I don't think he has to but he's become the character.

 

[Joe Sixpack]

 

[Remote]

to you

"Entertaining" is subjective, but the numbers don't lie. And you can bet ESPN has the metrics to back up his value, hence his new deal. Whether tv ratings, his name trending on social media for something new and ridiculous he's said and done, his pod numbers, people imitating his antics, all of that shyt.

know what you saying, and there's a lot of people I don't get the appeal of, but they draw

The issue I have with the argument of “he makes them money” or “he gets views” is that there really ought to be a curation process about what exactly deserves attention and air time.

There’s a market for A LOT of things that aren’t catered to. Either because they’re illegal or immoral or whatever.

There’s a market for Middle East decapitation videos. You COULD make money off that. It will get views. But we all acknowledge that it’s a dark area that doesn’t deserve a spotlight. Just because you CAN make money off something doesn’t mean you SHOULD or should want to.

Now I already know some coli moron is gonna say “are you comparing SAS to terrorists decapitating people?” NO. I AM NOT. What SAS does isn’t even close to that. What I AM SAYING is: despite the attention and money that SAS is generating, he is ultimately a net negative for the NBA. And probably sports in general.

The NBA ought to have a tighter grip on its product and how it’s represented. I’m not advocating for censorship of SAS. That’s probably a fine line. But I don’t think they ought to allow him to harm their image — especially when you’re doing direct business with his employer.

 

[Rekkapryde]

The issue I have with the argument of “he makes them money” or “he gets views” is that there really ought to be a curation process about what exactly deserves attention and air time.

There’s a market for A LOT of things that aren’t catered to. Either because they’re illegal or immoral or whatever.

There’s a market for Middle East decapitation videos. You COULD make money off that. It will get views. But we all acknowledge that it’s a dark area that doesn’t deserve a spotlight. Just because you CAN make money off something doesn’t mean you SHOULD or should want to.

Now I already know some coli moron is gonna say “are you comparing SAS to terrorists decapitating people?” NO. I AM NOT. What SAS does isn’t even close to that. What I AM SAYING is: despite the attention and money that SAS is generating, he is ultimately a net negative for the NBA. And probably sports in general.

The NBA ought to have a tighter grip on its product and how it’s represented. I’m not advocating for censorship of SAS. That’s probably a fine line. But I don’t think they ought to allow him to harm their image — especially when you’re doing direct business with his employer.

I see what you saying, but you can't compare Middle East Decapitations to SAS acting the fool on TV man.

But the NBA 100% should have a better grip on the people covering their product in regards to shytting on the brand.

Entertainment is 100% subjective whether we like it or not tho. The shyt some find entertaining is mind boggling to me at times, but I'm sure there's a lot of shyt cats can say about the shyt I watch and listen to.

SAS as Brick on General Hospital is fukkin hilarious tho. Sorry, but that shyt is jokes

 

[SunZoo]

SAS is who he is because he's an entertainer, for better or worse he get's the computers putin.

 

[Remote]

I see what you saying, but you can't compare Middle East Decapitations to SAS acting the fool on TV man.

But the NBA 100% should have a better grip on the people covering their product in regards to shytting on the brand.

Entertainment is 100% subjective whether we like it or not tho. The shyt some find entertaining is mind boggling to me at times, but I'm sure there's a lot of shyt cats can say about the shyt I watch and listen to.

SAS as Brick on General Hospital is fukkin hilarious tho. Sorry, but that shyt is jokes

Dude,

I literally fukkin explained the point behind the decapitation example and said it wasn't the same thing.



It's about "there being a market" not being a good excuse for "we ought to do it"

 

[Rekkapryde]

Dude,

I literally fukkin explained the point behind the decapitation example and said it wasn't the same thing.



It's about "there being a market" not being a good excuse for "we ought to do it"

could've used a better example tho

 

[Remote]

could've used a better example tho

Alright I've had enough of this foolishness.
Let me go see who your team drafted last night.

...Asa Newell.
Not bad.

 

[The_Sheff]

Why are you protecting that buffoon with this set of pivoting questions?

Either point out the flaws in the article or move the fukk on. Yall dudes are annoying as fukk with your inability to focus on WHAT is being said.

I ain’t protecting anyone.

shyt is a basic question. If you get rid of someone, it is safe to assume they will be replaced by someone else correct?

If every person y’all hype up who discusses the NBA is Stephen A level or worse, then what are we really talking about here?


Personally I like hearing Antonio Daniel’s discuss the game on Sirius. But he on midday for a reason and nobody been beating down his doors to make the big boy jump.

People want to hear Stephen A, people want to hear Perk, people want to hear Barkley, it is what it is.

 

[Joe Sixpack]

I ain’t protecting anyone.

shyt is a basic question. If you get rid of someone, it is safe to assume they will be replaced by someone else correct?

If every person y’all hype up who discusses the NBA is Stephen A level or worse, then what are we really talking about here?


Miss me with your argument of “Stephen A equals bad” without making a point on who would replace him.

Dawg

You're asking who would replace him?

He can replaced by many different people in the business

People make mistakes man. You over here acting like ESPN has to know what they're doing because they choose to give him that contract no they do not what they are doing.

ESPN has made and continues to make mistakes with their business model

First Take was built by Skip Bayless, another reprehensible person, but he built that show

Stephen A is not needed on First Take AT ALL

AT ALL

No one watches First Take to hear what Stephen A says

 

[BigTyme Records]

His fakkit ass offers nothing to the NBA

No breaking news, no in-depth analysis, just screaming. Gtfo breh.

 

[The_Sheff]

Dawg

You're asking who would replace him?

He can replaced by many different people in the business

People make mistakes man. You over here acting like ESPN has to know what they're doing because they choose to give him that contract no they do not what they are doing.

ESPN has made and continues to make mistakes with their business model

First Take was built by Skip Bayless, another reprehensible person, but he built that show

Stephen A is not needed on First Take AT ALL

AT ALL

No one watches First Take to hear what Stephen A says

If this was an ESPN only issue maybe you would have a point.

But it isn’t.

Look at who is getting the views and ears when it comes to NBA discussion on every platform.

That will tell you why Stephen A is where he is.


Stephen A may not be needed for First Take but a carnival barker of some sort is. Soooooooooo what are we talking about here?