brianstl Posted March 1, 2007 Author Share Posted March 1, 2007 I didn't make fun of his personal appearance. I never made a comment about his personal appearance. You believing I did says much more about you than me. I joked that a few free dinners might sway his opinion. You taking that as he is obese states your opinion of him not mine. It has been a long time joke that sports writers can be bought with food. I meant nothing more than that. Maybe Bernie needs to find some friends that don't first think of his appearance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Actually it shows I don't judge people based on their physical appearance, unless it is a requirement for the topic, i.e. a basketball player. Several people here did in the thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted March 1, 2007 Author Share Posted March 1, 2007 Have replied to one of those post and stated it was in poor taste and not mine. So, you you have answered when I asked how my post was in poor taste, that you were refering to someone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 I "should" have done whatever I wanted and however I wanted to do it. Several people posted in that manner. This entire thread in fact, is also in poor taste, making up quotes and attributing them to someone else. I obviously knew it was a poor attempt at humor, but a long list of others didn't, making your thread murky at best. You can post again, I am finished with this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted March 1, 2007 Author Share Posted March 1, 2007 Is it in poor taste or is it murky? It doesn't matter. You took it as me ripping on Bernie's appearance. I was not and the only reason you took it that way is because that is how you precieve Bernie. You get called on it and then you say you are done with this thread. You are nothing more than a blowhard. Next time you start preaching about what someone else post on this board, look in the mirror. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basketbill Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 However he comes close to a similar statement on his blog....now Courtside he can stand up for himself. However childish jabs at SLU or whoever he is targeting at the moment is tiresome. He should try to be more like Burwell and lose the childish antics. It seems most every sports journalist at the post is better than Burwell's understudy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Now you are telling me what I think and my entire thought process. Interesting. I didn't tell you what you should or shouldn't do. I told you my opinion ....that is different than telling someone what they should or shouldn't do. And the end result is the petty name-calling. Par for the course with this board. You, not me decided to make a quotes to someone else and post them here to get some sort of satisfaction from it. Many believed what you posted to be true, because you didn't insinuate your were lying and fabricating. And even one person questioned why you would even start such a thread. You can spin it all you like, but you intentionally fabricated quotes and fabricated a story to intentionally put someone in a negative light. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 >However he comes close to a similar statement on his >blog....now Courtside he can stand up for himself. However >childish jabs at SLU or whoever he is targeting at the >moment is tiresome. He should try to be more like Burwell >and lose the childish antics. > >It seems most every sports journalist at the post is better >than Burwell's understudy. Several people in this thread did not know it was a joke. I actually have spoken to people fro this board who did not know it was a joke, and someone posted over in BM's forum with the information received here that was not taken as a joke. I am sure some people, like yourself and myself found it to be some sort of attempt at humor, but obviously "everyone" didn't see it that way. Many did not. I have a problem with fabrication to intentionally try to harm anyone. I also have a problem with making deragotory comments about people's physical appearance. It just so happens this is about BM. I would do the same for anyone else. I disagree often with BM, especially regarding college sports, but I don't deem it necessary to lie, fabricate and make deragatory comments about his physical appearance. I have a problem with racial bias and bigotry too, for example, ....but that wasn't a topic in this thread. I can easily debate and disagree with people without the childlike antics....like you just pulled basketbill. So if you think someone makes childlike remarks....why join them? that makes you the same. Why not just debate the topics without the childlike antics? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted March 1, 2007 Author Share Posted March 1, 2007 Again where did I try to harm BM and where did I make comments about his appearance? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basketbill Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 What child like response did I make. If it is not referring to someone by name, then let me explain. A columnist benefits by having people talk about their columns, their sport show, their opinions. Your friend has repeatedly thrown in little childish jabs here and there which hurts both his argument as well as his subjects. Burwell however can write an article, critically without such childish jabs. He has clearly in my view become the number one sports writer at the Post. Until his assistant starts to behave professionally I choose not to name him, No comment about personal characteristics, just his behavior. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted March 2, 2007 Author Share Posted March 2, 2007 Courtside will never admit when he is wrong. You can hit him upside the face with the proof, but he will never admit it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 >Courtside will never admit when he is wrong. You can hit >him upside the face with the proof, but he will never admit >it. Not sure what the Kshoe comment is.... But I definitely do not fabricate facts in my posts....and I do not hold bias against people for their physcial appearance, ...race, weight, looks, etc....and try not to call people names. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted March 2, 2007 Author Share Posted March 2, 2007 Where did I say anything about Bernie's appearance? That is the reason you gave for my post being in poor taste. You can't admit you were wrong about that, just like you can't admit you were wrong about the reason the MVC plays a 18 game schedule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 >What child like response did I make. If it is not referring >to someone by name, then let me explain. A columnist >benefits by having people talk about their columns, their >sport show, their opinions. Your friend has repeatedly >thrown in little childish jabs here and there which hurts >both his argument as well as his subjects. Burwell however >can write an article, critically without such childish >jabs. > >He has clearly in my view become the number one sports >writer at the Post. Until his assistant starts to behave >professionally I choose not to name him, > >No comment about personal characteristics, just his >behavior. I posted referring to people who make fun of people for their physical appearance as many did in the thread. I also posted because the quotes were fabricated. Those were separate from yours, ...I said your comments were childish and they were. Your commetns were everything you say you don't like of Miklasz. Miklasza and Burwell are columnists. One is not the assistant of the other. That is known to 100% of this board, including yourself. So therefore, your comments are no better than whatever comments you allege. Brad Soderberg is a friend of mine too. It would be no different for him, or for any stranger. Whom I know doesn't matter in this instance. I don't see the relevance of Brad's physical appearance to his job. I also would point it out if someone posted fabricated quotes from Brad. I'd probably do the same for you too Basketbill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 >Where did I say anything about Bernie's appearance? That is >the reason you gave for my post being in poor taste. You >can't admit you were wrong about that, just like you can't >admit you were wrong about the reason the MVC plays a 18 >game schedule. I wasn't wrong on why the MVC currently plays an 18 game schedule. I actually know differently. I am not guessing about it. I am wrong all the time, just like anyone else, but not about that. Actually I already commetned on the other stuff. I posted that the physical appearance comments were in poor taste. Then I also posted that the entire fabricated quotes and thread were in poor taste too. Whether your comments had anything to do with physical appearance or not, I wouldn't know, because like the thread itself, it was strange, as commented by other posters in this thread. And one would have had to ask you. After the fact, you said it had nothing to do with that. I really don't care at this point, because again, my comments are on what I read in the thread. I have already covered this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Area Billiken Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 I haven't had time to read all this thread. Miklasz's statement, if said, at minimum, was in very poor taste. He should be ashamed of himself. This Dr. Chaifetz is giving $12M to SLU. One of these days, in the hopefully not so distant future, SLU will again be playing in the NCAA. Then what is Bernie going to say? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FromGreeceWithLove Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 I am in the same boat as you. I did not hear what he said or see what he wrote, but I question how anyone could call out an individual for donating $12 million to their alma mater. Dr. Chaifetz should receive nothing but praise for sticking to a promise he made when he was given the chance to attend Saint Louis University. Bernie needs to get over himself, I am guessing at some point Bernie was cut off at the buffet line at Savvis Center and since has nothing but anger towards the program. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westy03 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 he wrote this in his pressbox regarding SLU naming rights. Not sure what he is trying to prove with the AD and the changes. Some of the foolks in the AD office were alarmed by other proposed changes.... and were trying to fight them off. So I know what I am talking about, but it does not matter, because SLU fans prefer the Candyland version of reality they hear from SLU's media spin doctors. --B Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NashvilleBilliken Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 Does anybody honestly know what Bernie's deal is? Ya know, it's one thing to come on here and rip on people. It's a message board, people are bored, and we have youngens who found a way to escape their parents wrath. But this guy is supposed to be a jounalist. It seems the guy always has some real ###### comment to say about slu fans. We prefer the Candy land version. Media spin doctors. Acceptors of mediocrity. So on and so forth. I've never seen somebody in his position make things so personal. Did he get molested by the Billiken when he was a kid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 >he wrote this in his pressbox regarding SLU naming rights. >Not sure what he is trying to prove with the AD and the >changes. > >Some of the foolks in the AD office were alarmed by other >proposed changes.... and were trying to fight them off. > >So I know what I am talking about, but it does not matter, >because SLU fans prefer the Candyland version of reality >they hear from SLU's media spin doctors. > >--B I actually went back to look for it and read it. BM's comments in tha particular thread were regarding SLU's building itself and the construction of the building. Originally the design of the building was not satisfactory for SLU's AD and Atheltic Dept and that dept had to fight off many other proposed changes to the new Arena, besides seating capacity, assumably from higher administration and others. He never in his forum said anything about the new donor. He basically stuck up for SLU's AD. Unless there is something else I missed somewhere else? And we all know the other comments to start this thread were fabrication. If something else was said I would be interested to know and would ask him myself and report it back here. A thread like this begins out of fabrication and many people don't read the entire thread to know that it is fabrication and that is how false rumors etc...get started and escalated. If something else was said somehwere else besides this, then I am under-informed, but this was all that was referenced to my knowledge....the same thing every one here wanted to fight for themselves...a first rate facility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted March 2, 2007 Author Share Posted March 2, 2007 THey were not fabrications. There is a difference. It was probably a poor attempt at sarcasm, but it was sarcasm and nothing more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westy03 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 Courtide you are right, this is all that I have read or have heard. It seemed like he wasnt happy about changing the new arena to smaller capacity in order to have the offices, weight room, etc... which I think it dumb, jmho. Then he says that people in the Athletic Department not the director were up in arms over addtional changes that he never revealed. He responed by "im in the know". Honestly I can give two shits about it. In over a year or so we will have a new arena and excitment surrounding the program hopefully it will lead to numerous NCAA tourney appearances. Then we wont have to worry about him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 >Courtide you are right, this is all that I have read or have >heard. It seemed like he wasnt happy about changing the new >arena to smaller capacity in order to have the offices, >weight room, etc... which I think it dumb, jmho. Then he >says that people in the Athletic Department not the director >were up in arms over addtional changes that he never >revealed. He responed by "im in the know". > >Honestly I can give two shits about it. In over a year or >so we will have a new arena and excitment surrounding the >program hopefully it will lead to numerous NCAA tourney >appearances. Then we wont have to worry about him. I am not going to assume what he was thinking, because he didn't say other than to say there was more information. As for the Arena itself...that alone will not solve SLU's problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.