What if Bayless or another “white” guest on there raised issue with his girlfriend, wife or finance being white? him possibly not voting Democrat? his hair? I think you could count the seconds on your hands before they would be handed a pink slip.

If you look back at his First Take or writing, ESPN has normally given him a pass when he’s said stuff like this before. Cue up any of the stuff before the 2012 NFL Draft where he labeled every “White GM” racist for picking Andrew Luck before RGIII due to skin color. However, he was doing the same thing Jason Whitlock and Bomani Jones were writing on FOXSports.com/sbnation.com with 0 repercussions. There were folks (oddly enough Skip Baseless) who wanted RGIII due to the ceiling being higher than Luck, but that case was made by others who appreciated both. So, to sum up, even though people feared the typical demise of running QBs, as we’ve seen twice this year, you were called racist for admitting you would take Luck over RGIII based on pure talent.

One has to think ESPN is doing this “evaluation period” so they don’t get sued by the organization mentioned above or Parker for unlawful termination because he’d be bitter.

Love the show, or hate it. But to make First Take out to be some sort of race baiting show is bullshit. Those guys give their opinions on a variety of subjects, and they don’t run from their opinions, which I respect from anyone I agree or disagree with. They give it straight with no chaser.

Are you @baylessdefender???

I don’t believe this, seems too convenient that one of them is always going out on a limb with something or trying to start shit with a team/athlete…they know what they’re doing and it’s mostly manufactured with the irony being Rob Parker probably was saying what he really felt and caught the worst of it

Going out on a limb could more accurately be described as giving their opinion. Neither Stephen A. or Skip Bayless just came on the scene yesterday. Not only have they been known for being highly opinionated for decades, but they’ve been that way as beat writers for the teams they cover. That means they’ve written it and gone into the lockerroom afterwards. In this case, they make the show more than the show making them, so there would be no need for ESPN to “manufacture” opinions for these 2.

You forgot The Conversation, Night Moves, Unforgiven, Enemy of the State and Heist. Cannot have a definitive Hackman list without those.

narrow margin

Those guys give their opinions

I don’t believe this, seems too convenient that one of them is always going out on a limb with something or trying to start shit with a team/athlete…they know what they’re doing and it’s mostly manufactured with the irony being Rob Parker probably was saying what he really felt and caught the worst of it

that’s gotta be a top 10 resume all-time, no?

You forgot The Conversation, Night Moves, Unforgiven, Enemy of the State and Heist. Cannot have a definitive Hackman list without those.

French Connection, Mississippi Burning, Hoosiers, Behind Enemy Lines, Royal Tenenbaums. Thoughts on his acting chops aside, that’s gotta be a top 10 resume all-time, no?

He was great in Superman as well

Gene Hackman is a legend. It’ll be a sad day when he finally passes.

French Connection, Mississippi Burning, Hoosiers, Behind Enemy Lines, Royal Tenenbaums. Thoughts on his acting chops aside, that’s gotta be a top 10 resume all-time, no?

I injected opinion, and i expected brush-back from that specific line.

Go get ‘em Skip

I wish us white folks had an association that covers our asses when we fuck up and should be fired

We do, it’s called Fox News.

that’s a very fair criticism of the piece. I injected opinion, and i expected brush-back from that specific line.

Fair enough. I appreciate the response. Although you’re not as public of a figure as some, you do have a highly viewed blog and because of that, I think you should hold yourself to a higher standard than taking cheap shots at some people that are your readers. The statement reminded me of Mitt Romney’s 47% statement although the context was obviously much different.

that being said, I completely stand by the “unemployed and uninformed” line.

Mark Cuban can explain the uninformed part (he did on the show earlier this year).

I think you’re uninformed if that’s your only source of information, the same as I think people are uninformed if they only pay attention to one news source(ex. Fox or MSNBC). These guys are made to make opinions that some will agree with and some won’t. It doesn’t make them right or wrong anymore than yours or mine are wrong. The difference is that they are in a public forum and there are times where it’s obviously they make inflammatory statements just to push the meter. Other than that, it just makes me think of two buddies arguing over sports. I think most of us wish we could get paid to do that.

Gene Hackman is a legend.

He ain’t gonna shoot me? Then he hadn’t ought to point a gun at me. It’s insincere.

Mark Cuban can explain the uninformed part (he did on the show earlier this year).

Gene Hackman is a legend. It’ll be a sad day when he finally passes.

You heard me, Coltrane

Just because people have different schedules or different opinions doesn’t make them “unemployed and uninformed”. I just find statements like that to be very elitist and insulting, especially considering a lot of the reason his blog has been successful(making him a nice chunk of change) is because of these “unemployed and uninformed” people.

that’s a very fair criticism of the piece. I injected opinion, and i expected brush-back from that specific line.

I remember he used to hate on Colin Cowherd

when did this site ever mention Colin Cowherd before “the incident?”

I believe it was once – when he had a dust-up with another blog.