Who took the worst beating last night??

[HarvardBlue]

Giving new meaning to the phrase "no name" isn't wrong? You don't remember Bailey stopping the next big thing Mike Jones and basically running him out of boxing? Fighting Miguel Cotto? Ali Funeka beating Raheem?

They may not have been elite p4p fighters or wildly famous but they sure as hell weren't no names within the sport. If you don't know what the hell you're talking about, do some research. Learn your craft. Often times just because you don't know something doesn't mean it's unknown to the world or in it's field...

I know who both of them are but Stephen A doesn't know. He represents the typical casual fan. To suggest he does research first to find out who they are is making the point Stephen A was making.

Steohen A will admit his knowledge of boxing is limited. Some of the things he says when he talking boxing is cringeworthy. Why ESPN had him on there makes no sense.

[NearHypnos]

I know who both of them are but Stephen A doesn't know. He represents the typical casual fan. To suggest he does research first to find out who they are is making the point Stephen A was making.

Steohen A will admit his knowledge of boxing is limited. Some of the things he says when he talking boxing is cringeworthy. Why ESPN had him on there makes no sense.

It's not making his point because they have him specifically covering this. Yes, his knowledge is that of a casual fan but the casual fan doesn't get to cover the fight. As such, he should at least know who he's covering, right? Nobody is asking him to get full background checks on everybody in the sport ever, but if you have to say "Yeah I dont really know about Horn" you can at least do a 2-3 minute boxrec search. Horn, who'd he beat? He beat Bailey? Who's Bailey, who's he fought? Oh s hit, he fought Cotto? Oh, Funeka beat the guy who beat Morales?

And if you don't want to do that at least don't come into the sport you're covering acting like you know who's who and who isn't. That's the main point of it. It's one thing to not know and go based off that and not pretend you do...it's another to not know and make it up along the way.

You wouldn't show up to cover an NFL game (with almost no knowledge of the sport) between lets say..the az cardinals and Patriots and start going "Who tf is Larry Fitzgerald? No one knows that guy. He's not even good and gives new meaning to the word second string" simply based off more people knowing Tom Brady.

The casual fan doesn't know Bailey and Funeka for example but the casual fan also is going to assume Stephen A knows more than them and thus go based off that.


It's fine to be bad or not know..but keep it real. "Hey, I don't know much about Horn or his oponents... I know from doing a 2 second look into Randal Bailey he's fought guys like Miguel Cotto so Horn has been in there with some experienced guys" or blah blah.


Boxing fans know he doesn't know..HE knows he doesn't know...so just keep it real and do a boxrec scan for 2 seconds on your way to the studio or while taking a s hit, anything lol

[HarvardBlue]

It's not making his point because they have him specifically covering this. Yes, his knowledge is that of a casual fan but the casual fan doesn't get to cover the fight. As such, he should at least know who he's covering, right? Nobody is asking him to get full background checks on everybody in the sport ever, but if you have to say "Yeah I dont really know about Horn" you can at least do a 2-3 minute boxrec search. Horn, who'd he beat? He beat Bailey? Who's Bailey, who's he fought? Oh s hit, he fought Cotto? Oh, Funeka beat the guy who beat Morales?

And if you don't want to do that at least don't come into the sport you're covering acting like you know who's who and who isn't. That's the main point of it. It's one thing to not know and go based off that and not pretend you do...it's another to not know and make it up along the way.

You wouldn't show up to cover an NFL game (with almost no knowledge of the sport) between lets say..the az cardinals and Patriots and start going "Who tf is Larry Fitzgerald? No one knows that guy. He's not even good and gives new meaning to the word second string" simply based off more people knowing Tom Brady.

The casual fan doesn't know Bailey and Funeka for example but the casual fan also is going to assume Stephen A knows more than them and thus go based off that.


It's fine to be bad or not know..but keep it real. "Hey, I don't know much about Horn or his oponents... I know from doing a 2 second look into Randal Bailey he's fought guys like Miguel Cotto so Horn has been in there with some experienced guys" or blah blah.


Boxing fans know he doesn't know..HE knows he doesn't know...so just keep it real and do a boxrec scan for 2 seconds on your way to the studio or while taking a s hit, anything lol

Good points. Stephen A should have done his homework. ESPN should also made sure the guy they have anchoring such an historic boxing event didn't look like an a$$ on TV.

[FinitoxDinamita]

Giving new meaning to the phrase "no name" isn't wrong? You don't remember Bailey stopping the next big thing Mike Jones and basically running him out of boxing? Fighting Miguel Cotto? Ali Funeka beating Raheem?

They may not have been elite p4p fighters or wildly famous but they sure as hell weren't no names within the sport. If you don't know what the hell you're talking about, do some research. Learn your craft. Often times just because you don't know something doesn't mean it's unknown to the world or in it's field...

It it isnt wrong because Bailey was a nobody when Horns got to him.

Mike Jones? Lmfao that was nearly 5 years ago dude.

Ali funeka is a nobody

[soul_survivor]

Smith doens't know boxing and Al blew him out of the ring lol

[THC]

I know who both of them are but Stephen A doesn't know. He represents the typical casual fan. To suggest he does research first to find out who they are is making the point Stephen A was making.

Smith's point was that Bailey and Funeka aren't well known so Horn beating them means ****.

I think it's one thing to claim the two aren't household names (to casual fans). But what hit Bernstein's hot button is that Smith then implied their talent level sucks in order to denigrate Horn's resume. That's crap coming from a so-called boxing analyst. Smith's gift of gab is hampered by superficial domain knowledge. He needs to keep it real until he doesn't sound like a fool with these vacuous comments.