It is time somebody says it.
Charles Barkley is a blowhard. He is a welcher and a liar as of this morning. His immense popularity is unfortunate because his example is poor.
Not only is his analysis frequently dead wrong, I have watched as he has abused the other members of Inside the NBA on TNT, especially host Ernie Johnson.
He frequently butchers the English language and tries to use big words that do not make any sense in context.
He is not the first with bad grammar. Dizzy Dean had atrocious grammar. But much like Barkley, his fame and colorful style made up for it until he made a joke about a couple in the stands hugging and kissing during the game.
Dizzy was taken off the air immediately when he said, “See, he kisses her on the strikes and she kisses him on the balls.”
What would Barkley have to do in this day and age? We may be witness to it.
Everyone seems to know Sir Charles is a big gambler and frequently a big loser.
That seems to have no effect on TNT which has decided to look the other way.
But a welcher?
Welching on a bet does not settle well in any known demographic.
He has owed $400K to a casino in Las Vegas since October 2007. That became national news, and few NBA fans are not aware of it.
So how does one get back in the good graces of his audience and wipe away the stain on his reputation?
Pay the debt immediately, get on a stool next to your host before a big playoff game, and swear off gambling altogether.
Problem solved, rep saved. It will go away.
But wait!
During the “Charles, we need to talk” interview, he waffled even then, saying maybe he may look at things differently in a year or two.
Host Johnson's joke at the end fell flat. "Are you sticking with your prediction that the Hornets will win tonight?" Johnson asked Barkley.
Charles answered in the affirmative, and then Johnson queried, “Wanna bet?”
Ha ha.
Nobody needs to hear from me about Pete Rose, or any other athlete who bet himself into all kinds of hot water.
What makes Barkley really special is the news report this morning: Turns out Charles’ claim that he has paid the debt to the casino was a lie.
Barkley might be entertaining, but can TNT executives continue turning their heads?
comments (13) write a comment »
write a new comment
4 months ago
The "Wanna bet?" joke was extremely awkward, as was Charles' pair of white tennis shoes with his suit.
That said, Charles continues to be loved by all, so I'm not sure TNT will think anything of this; in fact, it might just be more coverage for them.
After all, this is the guy who said, "I'm not a role model."
4 months ago
Grow up. When millions of viewers watch Inside the NBA on TNT, do you think they think about how much money he owes some casino? Nobody gives a shit about that, Charles is entertaining. He is also a rare character and brings diversity to the show. I personally love to watch him because I really don't care what HIS predictions are or what anyone elses are on the show, a true basketball fan won't care what other people think and will stick to their own opinion. This whole article is the stupidest thing I have ever read and you wasted a lot of time writing it. Cracking on Barkley because he has said some things other analysts haven't is just completely disrespectful. Grow up and enjoy NBA entertainment instead of trying to ruin it with negative comments.
from 4 months ago
You have to love when a 17 year old tells someone who mentions Dizzy Dean in his article to "grow up" (two times).
While we are all impressed that you can use cuss words, Kosty, I think you missed the point of the article, which had nothing to do with the NBA, and much to do with one man, Charles Barkley, and his tired act. Barkley is funny and engaging, and I enjoy watching him, but he clearly doesn't do his research, and to top if off, he gets to use TNT as a stage for airing his gambling problems--rather than talking about basketball. Is that what a "true basketball fan" wants to watch: an overweight ex-player denying reports of gambling debts?
Furthermore, Barkley says whatever he wants, but when someone criticizes him it's "completely disrespectful"? Walk me through that one.
from 4 months ago
Kosty, you may try to understand that "NBA Entertainment" is basketball, not buffoons trying to make as many controversial comments as they can in 15 minutes. It is not negative comments by me that is ruining professional sports, it is being ruined by your ilk who have to be entertained by something other than what is happening on the court.
I thought there was no demographic out there willing to accept welching on bets ( not keeping commitments if you have trouble with the word welching). My mistake you apparently fit quite nicely.
If I can get one guy like you to think of integrity as being significant in all walks of life then I have not wasted any time at all.
Good luck on your vocablulary development, perhaps with a little maturity you will not find it necessary to curse to make a point. I am sorry you feel my opinion is stupid. Your commet will not effect my opining in future.
4 months ago
Wow...what do you prefer? some drawn out commentator? Would you like the contrived guys from ESPN, maybe STEPHEN A. SMITH WHO TALKS LIKE THIS. Leave Chuck alone, he is entertaining and was a heck of a player.
4 months ago
You make a good point Mueze, on Stephen A., and who hired Reggie Miller as color commentator? I can turn Sir Blow Hard off at halftime, but I have to listen to Reggie during the game. Painful. Chuck was one of my favorite all time round ball guys. You are really not tired of Charles yet? Do you welch on bets?
4 months ago
Reggie Miller is terrible. He pronounced Melvin Ely's last name "Ell..ee." Great research, Reg. Ely played in the league when Miller did too.
4 months ago
Charles Barkley is a dumbass.
He agrees with me.
http://hoopeduponline.com/2008/05/12/charles-barkely-dumbass/
4 months ago
That's hilarious.
4 months ago
Big, I notice that you didn't hesitate long before maligning Charles Barkley's character, on accusations that, I think, turned out to be unsubstantiated. Saw some article saying that he had actually cleared the debt but not the 10% D.A.'s fee. If so, I'll forbear from saying that someone was being malicious or spiteful, although I may be heard saying "hasty" (or even - wait for it.... - "indicative".) Charles is, after all, a man noted for his honesty. So, do not - I say - call so gleefully for a quick lynching at first light next time. At least not until some light has properly been shed on the matter.
That aside, I disagree with you branding Kosty and mueze as being sympathetic to welchers even though their arguments focused on Charles' appeal as a funnyman. Acknowledging someone's positive traits is not, imo, the same as denying that person's bad ones let alone endorsing those same qualities. I also disagree with your patronizing tone regarding English vocabulary and especially grammar (as I feel - and I'm the one that counts - that grammatical norms may lean as much on the subjective side (good one) as the "quantitative values" that define the purity of "NBA entertainment".)
Also, Tim, calling Charles funny and engaging after accusing his routine of being tiresome in the preceding sentence is confusing, and maybe even contrary.
from 4 months ago
Wax, let me first of all object to the use of the word "lynching". What that connotes is egregious in that making anything about my comments to be racially motivated would be completely off base. Secondly you missed the point altogether. What would it take to discredit Barkley to the point where TNT would get enough?
. The paying of the $400,000 eight months after the hotel took his markers is enough to make him a welcher. Without the publicity, how long would he have taken? We are not talking about a parking ticket here. Can anybody forget about a $400k debt for gambling? Shed some light on that.
I do not know why you say Barkley is noted for his honesty. He is noted for his humor, his colorful commentary, and having been one of the greatest players to walk out on the court. The most procutive for a man his height. He is noted for being a compulsive gambler.
I just put a question out there that is relevant as follows: Welching is not received well in any societal tier. So how long before he becomes a bad example, too bad to leave on the air. Remember he waffled on his statement to quit gambling during the interview.
Like Tim I am tired of his act, hardly a contradiction. I love basketball and do not need to be entertained by commentators who attempt to create controversy. So NBA entertainment has a singular meaning for me, basketball. The rest matters little.
I parsed your parenthetical remark with parenthetical phases within following "especially grammar" and cannot determine its meaning. So I cannot respond. I am glad you feel you are the one who counts as confidence is important.
Welcome to BR, I look forward to hearing more from you.
4 months ago
Very good article, and got lots of comments, great job.
I remember I loved Barkly on the court, always wished he would come to San Anton, but that was always just wishful thinking, just like having Kobe make it over to the Spurs, lol.
But as some other person said commenting to your article, I have to agree. What he does off the court, gambling, lieing or whatever, it may bother some and if it does then they won't watch him, like me, he talks to much and I never knew about his gambling, I just never cared for the way he thinks he knows it all. Lots of people renig on bets, I have a hard time believing that he did that at a casino but I'm sure it could happen. Whats good about that is they can't go back in there, and his name will be passed around up there so that other cosinos won't let him in ether, this way it stops him from betting, lol. And maybe that is what he was trying to do, he didn't take that bet about NO did he?
Keep up the good work as getting people to reply. GO SPURS GO!!!
4 months ago
Thanks Matt
write a new comment