|
Yeah, I'd be willing to give that show a try too. I hope it shows highlights somewhat equally though as opposed to 25 minutes on the Yankees-Red Sox game and 20 seconds for each other game.
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2012 23:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 23:34 |
|
|
Maybe ESPN just stopped giving a poo poo and didn't think someone would match up an article on RealGM to a random SportsCenter story. If Rudolph hadn't been watching, nothing probably happens. The Lynn Hoppes and Chris Broussard stuff got swept under the rug. Doesn't seem to be a priority for them.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2012 05:20
|
|
|
He's good in an editor role. Has a nice eye for talent and lets that talent do work without too much oversight. The 30 for 30 series ended up being one of the best things ESPN has done in a long time. I also like his podcast because he gets good guests and lets them actually talk. I still think Grantland struggles to find its niche. It wants to do too much. Seems like they'd be best suited to putting our a handful of top tier articles/pieces everyday. But they throw in some low quality filler content which seems out of place at times. If they got rid of that, I think it'd help keep their message clearer.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2012 05:33
|
|
|
I'm halfway through Paterno. It's not that it's bad because it portrays Paterno in the same glorified air that he had a couple years ago, but it's just a bad book. There appears to be no narrative at all with it. I keep waiting for things to tie into the bigger picture, to go down a path. But it's a mishmash of stories and anecdotes by people you could get in any fluff piece. There isn't a lot of investigating being done by the author. For instance, there's a bunch of stories about people he touched, but he never interviews or talks to those people. Just sort of takes everyone's word for it. It's also really lovely historically. Now I'm not a college football expert, but I know a lot of the smoke he's blowing about the 70's and early 80's is simply not true. It's like he just asked some people with a vested interest in a story about it and didn't do any research on his own to confirm. I'll finish it up this week. I know people are saying he was in a tough spot and it's tough to go back and change things. But even if none of it happened, it's a terrible biography. And this from someone who can get into a biography on just about anyone.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2012 19:24
|
|
|
MourningView posted:I know it's fun to accuse Rick Riley of being a racist but yeah it's probably just that Lance Armstrong was a lot nicer to reporters and had cancer. And started a pretty large cancer foundation. Liar or not, his foundation has raised over half a billion dollars. He's personally donated significant money to it. It by all accounts does a lot of good in the world. morestuff posted:Zach Lowe from Sports Illustrated will be joining Grantland on October 1. They have a really talented staff covering the NBA there. That's a good pickup. Although there will be no shortage of Boston articles.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2012 23:36
|
|
|
haljordan posted:What's really hilarious is that deadspin linked to this article and trashed Bleacher Report for simply being one big SEO revenue machine, which is EXACTLY what deadspin does as well. The writer actually had the balls to use the phrase "This isn't journalism!!!" Deadspin is not an SEO revenue machine. Bleacher Report built themselves as a content farm in the same vain as eHow. They've tried to bring in some good writers to add some legitimacy and avoid getting hammered by Google like the other content farms. The Huffington Post approach to SEO. But Deadspin does nothing like that at all. They care about pageviews, but their traffic doesn't completely rely on search. MourningView posted:Deadspin would be much more tolerable if they didn't do tons of lovely stuff while simultaneously calling out everyone else (particularly ESPN) for shoddy journalism. But yes they are certainly a hell of a lot better than Bleacher Report (sorry, Jacobi But Deadspin isn't trying to be old school journalists. They aren't claiming to be a news source. It's like bashing The Daily Show for being critical of traditional media. I'm not a big fan of Deadspin. They have a great piece every now and then but do a lot of dumb stuff as well. But ESPN pretends to be a reputable news outlet while Deadspin doesn't.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2012 18:59
|
|
)
|
MourningView posted:They do all the time. They try to break stories, do a lot of crowing when they successfully do so, or get pissed off (justifiably, I should say) when they aren't properly credited for it. But so does TMZ. And I don't think they feel that they work by the same set of standards as the New York Times. I know it sort of unfairly shields them from criticism (in the same way The Daily Show is), but I feel there is a difference in a company aiming to be a news outlet and one aiming to be a gossip site. One has an ombudsman and the other has editors who post pictures of athlete's dicks. I do get what you're saying though. They do fall in that weird middle ground where they get to be goofy and dumb 90% of the time but pretend to be hardcore journalists on occasion and expect to be taken seriously.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2012 23:11
|
|
|
Deadspin had a nice today about ESPN's infatuation with Tebow. Fascinating to see how the Skip Bayless stuff bled into the rest of the network. And their listing of journalistic gently caress-ups is astounding.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2012 23:21
|
|
|
Fauxhawk Express posted:Looks like the article's been yanked now. This is bullshit to me. Even if you no longer stand behind what you wrote, you shouldn't cowardly delete it. When you post it, you've posted it. Deleting articles and posts just feels like trying to rewrite history.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2013 00:54
|
|
|
Like I've said, if he wrote for Deadspin or any other trendy blog he'd be a hero. His writing is not much different than favorites like Betheleham Shoals who is worshipped in the same circles that bash Simmons. ESPN just puts a huge target on anyone's back and makes a lot of other bloggers insanely jealous. To me he's like any other popular blog out there, hit or miss. When you write for a trendy blog, 90% of your work can be poo poo and no one cares. That 10% will get passed around like scripture. When you write for ESPN, you can't write anything that is poo poo. I do think his podcast is pretty good and he does a great job of getting his guests talk about interesting stuff. The NBA show has gotten better. Magic is real bad, but I guess they sort of need that "legend" spot filled by someone. Wilbon is the guy that I can't stand on the show. I like him in other stuff, but he comes across sort of smug on the show and I just think they'd be better off with someone who can lead the panelists better. Ernie Johnson does this better than just about anyone. Niwrad fucked around with this message at 20:32 on Feb 22, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2013 20:29
|
|
|
Wouldn't someone like Stan Van Gundy be good on the show? I always think a coach would make a great addition as they see things in the game differently from everyone else. Phil would be unique too.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2013 22:35
|
|
|
Olbermann comes across as the biggest rear end in a top hat in the world in the ESPN book. I don't think anyone had a nice thing to say about him. Someone talked about how they threw a party when he quit.barkingclam posted:I might be alone in this, but I thought Free Darko's basketball book was a lot better. It's a little dated, but still a fun read. I liked it, but I like his writing style most of the time. I just find the love for him humorous because he does the exact same stuff Simmons does. He wrote a huge piece about "the look" and whether Lebron had it. He routinely writes pieces comparing players to
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2013 19:29
|
|
|
All they care about is people talking about them. I know it's being portrayed as bad for ESPN, but I bet they are eating this up. They probably love Simmons tweeting about it. They love all the blogs ripping them apart. They threw any semblance of journalism out the window years ago and now it's just about doing and saying whatever they can to get eyeballs. The best way to respond to the crap is to just ignore it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2013 02:06
|
|
|
Why is it stupid to do so? If they don't, they give everyone at the company the right to trash other ESPN products. Simmons was spot-on with his criticism and ESPN airing that crap is a joke, but I understand a company not wanting their employees going after other parts of the company.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2013 08:01
|
|
|
I still think we are all being trolled.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2013 21:17
|
|
|
With the death of Roger Ebert today, reminds me of his post that tore Jay Mariotti to shreds. Bit prophetic with his "good luck getting your 1,000 word rants on the air". http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080828/COMMENTARY/808289997
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2013 20:58
|
|
|
Rovell has been doing this stupid poo poo for years. I can only guess that ESPN likes the attention it brings. ESPN has also had good ombudsman's in the past and it never changed anything.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2013 02:40
|
|
|
Mornacale posted:He doesn't think he did say a really offensive thing. Yep, he seems completely oblivious to coming across like a self-important shithead. This article is darrenrovell.txt. http://deadspin.com/5882348/darren-rovell-is-super-pissed-about-the-state-of-the-playboy-super-bowl-party-playboy-bunny-strikes-back
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2013 04:15
|
|
|
I thought this was an interesting piece that talks about the Blackhawks hypocrisy in demanding the firing of Susannah Collins. I also think it brings up a weird line that is crossed when teams own the networks that they play on. Josh Mora was also let go a couple years ago from the station for breaking a story that the Blackhawks didn't want out. There is a lot of talk of conflicts of interest when it comes to ESPN, but NBC puts their name on these regional networks and deserve the same criticism.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2013 06:21
|
|
|
Bernstein was also big into tearing down the culture at Penn State and college athletics as a whole. Can get a little "sports radioish" at times, but he's really good on social and cultural issues relating to sports.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2013 07:41
|
|
|
I thought Wilbon was better in the past before he became obsessed with being friends with every athlete. I also agree with Mornacle, I enjoy the TNT show because it feels real to me. Whether I agree with them or not, I truly believe that's their opinion. On ESPN it feels like people playing characters for the camera.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2013 00:52
|
|
|
Anals of History posted:Best I've heard was Bomani Jones' podcast. Felt like he did the best job of anyone I've heard when it comes to treating athletes as human beings and sports as a business. Problem is, he can't talk sports on his podcast anymore as part of his new contract with ESPN. Bomani Jones is such a weird guy. He seems intelligent and can really breakdown a sports topic, but his Twitter feed was like an angsty 14 year old.
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2013 01:06
|
|
|
It sucks he never got to enjoy a long NBA career but he ended up a millionaire, has a nice gig, and gets to date Charissa Thompson. His life is still real good.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2013 14:35
|
|
|
ChampRamp posted:ESPN/ABC's NBA contract is up in 2016 and with the emergence of Fox Sports 1, you have to wonder if one of the channel's big draws is in danger of leaving the network. If Fox is serious with this FS1 thing (which it appears they are), then they could throw an absurd amount of money for those NBA rights. If that happens, then it is time to panic. I think ESPN needs the NBA and the NBA needs ESPN. Barring Fox Sports 1 gaining huge market shares before 2016, I don't see why the NBA would want to leave. As we learned from the NHL, if ESPN doesn't have the rights to your sport, they aren't covering it. Even with the drop, ESPN's ratings are still pretty good for the daytime. Not sure what they can do better with the time. News shows are not going to work. Perhaps they could throw in higher quality analysis on their shows, but I don't know if that's what the daytime viewing audience wants to see. As horrible as Skip Bayless and others are, they do have a particular audience that is willing to tune in to see them.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2013 18:55
|
|
|
Ribsauce posted:I love when he unloads on garbage reporters. I am going to miss him calling Charles Robinson at yahoo! a slave catcher. I was afraid ESPN was going to ruin everything I love about him, next he won't be allowed to attack the NCAA anymore I'm not a big fan of Whitlock's columns but he's great when he goes after garbage reporters. He's got a funny Twitter account too that is usually filled with him making GBS threads on people. He's also got one of the better parody accounts that he actually acknowledges a bunch.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2013 08:21
|
|
|
I found this piece by Deadspin declaring that sources were safe with them hilarious. They outed Jenn Sterger years ago, frequently post complete e-mail trails from their sources, and having a history of their sources being outed quickly by other outlets because they left too much identifying information in the piece (this part is more Gawker and Gizmodo related). poo poo, they just last week poo poo on the source of the Pelini tape. Anyways, I couldn't find a least trustful place to leak something than Deadspin.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2013 16:42
|
|
|
Deadspin linked to this after the Red Sox won. http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2013/02/24/hard-get-excited-about-these-red-sox/GQ5hTjgKOg6MI3gxDOJQWJ/story.html
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2013 05:34
|
|
|
Is Rovell just trolling people these days or is he really like this? Every time I think he'll steer clear of a topic he goes in head first.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2013 08:22
|
|
|
It's a reality show with people playing to the cameras and being as extreme as they can. Judging all of youth football based on that is like judging all youth football on the show Dance Moms. It's pathetic that they would air something like that on television, but it's what some people find entertaining these days.Mr. Funny Pants posted:To be fair, the lifetime ban was appropriate regardless of the merit of the protest. But the yanking his credential for a year is hilarious. I don't know if it is fair though. You had a voter say he left names off so he didn't have to sit through a long ceremony. If you're pulling ballots because you don't like what they do with it, there should be a lot of others who lose theirs too. Mornacale posted:Whereas the arts are an extraordinarily important facet of culture and society, as well as extremely personally fulfilling and educationally valuable, sports are an entertainment product with the pleasant side-effect of improving physical fitness. Giving someone a scholarship for sports is as absurd as giving one for anime club, except it's possible to make a profit on the athlete by using them as slave labor. That's all subjective. Many people find sports a more important facet of culture and society. I guarantee many athletes find their achievements personally fulfilling. As for educationally valuable, I imagine knowledge of Early Baroque Composers is about as valuable as knowledge of a 3-Deep Zone when it comes to the real world. And the people who are shaping the Arts in today's society aren't the people who went to Oregon State on scholarship for it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2014 07:29
|
|
|
I think it's a tough spot to be in for a writer. Showing that she is a con-artist is part of the story. And you can't prove the con-artist part without it outing her. Definitely could have been handled better but is he supposed to write that she's a fraud but isn't allowed to tell everyone why? Wouldn't that be pretty lovely journalism on his part too? Also the Gary McCord stuff should have been delved into much deeper. Obviously he either made that poo poo up about her or she really pulled a fast one on him.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2014 06:44
|
|
|
MourningView posted:I know being an annoying devil's advocate is like your thing, but this is ridiculous for reasons people have already covered earlier in the thread. What are those reasons? There's 20 different responses in this thread on how he should have handled it. If he leaves that part out, he is writing an article making a serious accusation against a business without providing evidence. And raising those questions in an open-ended manner (as some have suggested) likely leads to outing her anyways. Someone else would inevitably do the digging to find out what he left out. I just don't see any way of disclosing she is a fraud without it leading to her being outed down the road. That's why I think it's difficult for the writer. Personally I would have passed on the piece if I was him. It's something you can't do properly without causing harm to her in a matter that shouldn't cause her harm.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2014 07:28
|
|
|
Crazy Ted posted:Sooner or later, the author may have had to mention Dr. V's past existence as a man in some way since in order to fully investigate what turns out to be dubious claims like you're going to have to investigate the person's past both as a man and as a woman since the person will have used different names. I agree. The way he presented it was sophomoric and unnecessary. But strictly in terms of outing, I don't think it matters how he words it. So in that regard, it's an odd position for a writer to be in. If he absolutely needs to write the article, that information is going to come out (through him or someone else). The blame should be more with the editor who let the story run. A story about a new putter built by a physics guru who developed Stealth Bombers is fascinating stuff. What he was left with was not. Definitely not a story of the magnitude to risk outing someone. It's poo poo that you'd find on Gawker, it shouldn't be on Grantland.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2014 11:34
|
|
|
Male. Bi. Unix. posted:It's actually not that relevant, though. You're considering it as another lie in the tapestry or whatever, when like... "I found no record of anyone by that name attending University at that time" is just as good as "Dr. V used to be a dude! Here's quotes by people she cut ties with that are just straight up hate speech!" I'm not gonna say she's a perfect immaculate angel, but there's a very obvious path to take that doesn't involve treating her gender like a plot point in a mystery novel. That is still indirectly outing her. Grantland is a big enough outlet that someone else would pick up where the author left off and fill-in the blanks.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2014 06:25
|
|
|
Male. Bi. Unix. posted:"I found no record of X at that university" is a pretty common thing with academic forgeries, and, to my knowledge, has never involved a witchhunt as to exactly why that was the case. Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel like 99% of people will just accept that kind of statement, and the remaining 1% will give up well before any sort of name changes come into play. Some blog looking for clicks would have followed up on the story and filled in the blanks. You are vastly underestimating what sites will do for traffic these days, especially if they can latch on to a story from a major site like Grantland. joepinetree posted:"SOmeone else would have done it" isn't a valid excuse to violate basic ethical norms. I didn't say it was. I personally don't think the article should have been published at all. I'm just saying that in either form of that article, she gets outed. The re-write that was posted doesn't change what ends up happening.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2014 06:37
|
|
|
Male. Bi. Unix. posted:I would be very interested in seeing a story from a major site about some kind of academic credential fraud gone into further depth on some blog somewhere. Do you have a link to that sort of story? It's not common to come across those stories in sports. George O'Leary is the first to come to mind, but that was at a time before sports blogs were really a thing. David Chao's story was expanded on by Deadspin a few years back, and they went into it even further in April. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Do you really think that no sports blog or other entity online would use that article as a springboard to delve deeper into it and uncover something that might bring in clicks? That's sort of their entire existence.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2014 07:11
|
|
|
MourningView posted:For a story about a goofy putter? No. Who's creator killed herself before the story was released. Male. Bi. Unix. posted:I think, largely speaking, getting hits for content is as easy as putting up slideshows of The Ten Most Overpaid Players In Baseball, and that doing actual investigative work is beyond their capabilities. Deadspin expanding upon their own story is one thing, a small blog expanding upon Deadspin's story for them (and getting attention for it) is quite another. I think you're vastly underestimating that form of media. A woman can accuse an athlete of sexual assault and some blog will have unearthed every social media account she has along with her Yearbook photos from High School within the hour. You're talking Bleacher Report, I'm talking Deadspin, Terez Owens, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2014 07:25
|
|
|
Male. Bi. Unix. posted:The author outed her before the article was published. Thanks for keeping up. It was in response to a comment that the article was about a dumb putter. It was not about a dumb putter and someone else in sports media would have realized that when they found out she had killed herself. Someone would have looked into the story further either in an attempt to out her or to show malice on the part of Grantland. Male. Bi. Unix. posted:Searching Facebook is one thing (the identities of sexual assault victims are often very poorly hidden), getting academic records and government forms is a totally different thing. That 'thing' is the exclusive domain of places like Deadspin, who I would loving hope have someone on staff saying "hey guys, maybe we shouldn't out LGBT people without their permission." Gawker spent all last week outing a Congressman. They've insinuated Kerry Rhodes is gay for the last couple years despite his denial. Even made a joke a few weeks back about Aaron Rodgers being gay. They don't give a poo poo about outing people. And no, it's not the exclusive domain of Deadspin. Plenty of blogs do investigating on their own. There are a lot of tools available.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2014 07:46
|
|
|
How does Grantland even make money? I barely see any ads on their site at all.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2014 08:17
|
|
|
I would argue it is also for trying to hit the high school kid who drives the ball picker cart.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 23:34 |
|
|
Geno posted:Another Grantland classic about the 2002 WCF between the Kings/Lakers Was just about to post this. Grantland does some incredible work.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2014 01:34
|
|