What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Grantland.com (2 Viewers)

facook said:
I'm finding it increasingly difficult to forgive Simmons his fandom of the Patriots. I won't read any more of his stuff about Brady and Belichick. He can't be funny enough to disguise the fact that he's just another M ### h o l e apologist in his own way.
His Patriot SB preview podcast with his dad and some other boston d-bag was particularly galling.
Why did you listen to it then? Pretty obvious what that podcast was going to discuss.
I turned if off during the other d-bag guy's part. :shrug: I thought he might have some level of objectivity. A shred maybe? I was wrong.
That was the one where he literally opened it saying that this was a Boston-centric podcast and he was doing it as a fan, right? That one?
Yeah. You're a fan. Do you have any objectivity whatsoever? Or are you and all your buddies knee-jerk reactionary Boston fan-boys as well?
Yes, I think I can be objective when I want to be objective. Maybe Simmons can, I don't know. What I do know is that he started off the podcast saying that this was a Boston-centric podcast and he was going to call his dad and his best friend who was a Patriots season ticket holder. So it's odd to hear him say that, continue listening to the podcast, then come complain about what a homer he is.

I didn't watch/was never interested in 90210. Guess what I do when I start a podcast and find out it's going to be entirely about 90210?
I guess that's fair. I think that many times he DOES do a good job of being an obvious homer but still having some objectivity, poking fun at himself and his teams, and reaching the general listener. I don't know, maybe I was just more sensitive to it that day.
I also think he, and all of us obnoxious Patriot homers, are pretty sensitive right now. I think he wanted to commiserate with a couple of like-minded thinkers. He's usually not over the top like that I think.

 
Still like him.

don't read all his articles anymore and bail after football. I don't do basketball. But still enjoy his mailbag and picks
What part do you like about his picks? The Gambling Manifesto that isn't accurate or funny? Or the actual picks that don't ever win?

 
facook said:
I'm finding it increasingly difficult to forgive Simmons his fandom of the Patriots. I won't read any more of his stuff about Brady and Belichick. He can't be funny enough to disguise the fact that he's just another M ### h o l e apologist in his own way.
His Patriot SB preview podcast with his dad and some other boston d-bag was particularly galling.
Why did you listen to it then? Pretty obvious what that podcast was going to discuss.
I turned if off during the other d-bag guy's part. :shrug: I thought he might have some level of objectivity. A shred maybe? I was wrong.
he's a Pats homer, he doesn't need to be objective

 
Still like him.

don't read all his articles anymore and bail after football. I don't do basketball. But still enjoy his mailbag and picks
What part do you like about his picks? The Gambling Manifesto that isn't accurate or funny? Or the actual picks that don't ever win?
I just like the picks article, its hilarious now that hes always wrong. The manifesto is funny and he used to be not that bad. Although the year his wife beat him was hilarious. I've been reading him for a long time now. Back on the Page 2 days, I always liked his pop culture - article mix. :shrug:

 
I still like the podcast. Over the years, his head has swelled a little bit and the content has evolved a little, but generally, it's still a layman's view of sports doused with Boston homerism. His Woodward and Bernstein attack of Goddell is out of character for him IMO. I still can't figure out why GPJ goes out of his way to hate on him for years on end. Any celeb type that I don't like, I just ignore.

 
Good pieces today by Matt Hinton and Charles Pierce. Hinton writes about the football recruiting wars in Texas, which never fail to astonish the likes of a non-college- football fan like me. His link to a twitter battle between the guys who run the Texas and A&M fanboy websites emphasized the point that there are a certain group of people out there who are impossible to shame.

Pierce takes Marshawn Lynch's side in his battle with the media. Really, if you're a guy who reads or listens to athlete interviews, you're a guy who's not easily bored.

 
Simmons' BS report about SB props was like a full hour of screwy-###, wrong, logic.

Trying to get thru his SB Column right now, it's a bit better than "UR ALL H8ERS!!!!!!!" written in 72-point Comic Sans, but not by much.

 
I still like the podcast. Over the years, his head has swelled a little bit and the content has evolved a little, but generally, it's still a layman's view of sports doused with Boston homerism. His Woodward and Bernstein attack of Goddell is out of character for him IMO. I still can't figure out why GPJ goes out of his way to hate on him for years on end. Any celeb type that I don't like, I just ignore.
His attack on Goodell is spot-on. But the problem is no one cares. And they shouldn't. Like getting upset over the producers potentially mishandling The Big Bang Theory. It's not Watergate.

 
I still like the podcast. Over the years, his head has swelled a little bit and the content has evolved a little, but generally, it's still a layman's view of sports doused with Boston homerism. His Woodward and Bernstein attack of Goddell is out of character for him IMO. I still can't figure out why GPJ goes out of his way to hate on him for years on end. Any celeb type that I don't like, I just ignore.
His attack on Goodell is spot-on. But the problem is no one cares. And they shouldn't. Like getting upset over the producers potentially mishandling The Big Bang Theory. It's not Watergate.
Pretty great analogy lol

 
He's famous because he learned how to game the internet market before anybody and then he perfected it. For that he actually deserves a ton if credit.

As for caring about his opinions, I doubt many take him seriously. He keeps track of his own w/l record on betting games and it's typically awful.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You also can't sleep on the fact that he was heavily involved in coming up with and getting the 30 for 30 series off the ground, which has been a massive success for ESPN both financially and critically.

 
There were about 10 times in that Al Michaels interview that I wished bill would #### and let the story continue. Besides that, great podcast. I might have to check out michaels book.

 
If Simmons was directly responsible for hiring Bryan Curtis, however, then I'll give credit where credit is due. Another gem from Curtis today on the five obligatory minutes Marshawn Lynch put in at Media Day.
Yeah, Curtis has been killing it all week.
Repeating myself here and maybe it's because he covers a beat that is interesting to me, media and its relationship to its subjects, but Curtis keeps finding new things to say about stuff that's been out there a long time for all to see. His recent piece, kind of on Barkley, was really good.

 
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/moneyball-advanced-statistics-charles-barkley-sports-media-daryl-morey-al-leiter-rob-neyer-nba-mlb-nfl-nhl/Lots of people dislike Simmons. I get it. But some of the best writers on the Internets are on GL. Charles Pierce is a frigging god IMO.
I'm a Boston fan and can't stand Simmons. If I wanted to read about celebrity/movie/tv show du jour I'd be reading People or Entertainment Weekly. But his site has some great writers and articles.

Then again the way he writes is why he got so popular. You don't have to be a sports fan to read him because 70% of what he writes has nothing to do with sports. Good way to get the housewives to read your stuff.

 
downgoesbrown is the best NHL writing I've ever read. I think back to getting The Hockey News for about a dozen years and never finding anything half as interesting in it, even from guys like Stan Fischler who were supposed to be pot-stirrers.

 
This isn't about Grantland, but I didn't know where else to put it:

What the heck is up with ESPN suddenly all over Cricket? It's been all over the main webpage the last few weeks. It's insane.

 
He was on PTI and Tony Kornheiser's radio show this week. Called the other host "My Uncle Tony." They worked well together.

 
You could fill a thimble with the amount of actual basketball analysis in that column. None of which is about his defense.
Magary complaining that we know less about Kyrie the basketball player now than we did when the column started was spot-on.I check in on Grantland almost every day. There's an outstanding stable of writers there. And Bill Barnwell. But damn, Simmons has become the type of writer he used to rightfully criticize before he moved to LA.

IMO the best stuff Simmons has done himself in the past year was challenging the NFL league office over how they handled the Ray Rice fiasco, but even then Simmons let that escalate into a circus about him and his suspension over the actual story.

 
Not covered by Magary, but it opens with an "Editor's Note"....that's written by Simmons himself? What? He also writes at the end (Translation: I'm not done yet), referring to the upcoming rest of "Part 3." Even though the title refers to this, it's explained in the "Editor's Note" and he says twice that the rest of it is coming next week. OK WE UNDERSTAND WE WILL NOT THINK THAT YOU JUST FORGOT LEBRON AND DURANT AND CURRY AND WESTBROOK AND HARDEN.

 
Interview with re/code from SXSW:

Bill Simmons, ESPN’s popular and controversial multimedia star, is in Austin this weekend at the annual South by Southwest interactive festival, taping a series of podcasts — a longtime focus for him — for his Grantland site. Simmons’ contract with ESPN is up for renewal soon, and there’s lots of speculation that he might leave his longtime home — especially after the sports giant gave him a three-week suspension for comments he made about NFL head Roger Goodell last fall.

I talked to him for a few minutes, after he chatted with former “Saturday Night Live” star Horatio Sanz. This is an edited transcript of our conversation:

Peter Kafka: Why come to SXSW and spend it in a studio, doing podcasts?

Bill Simmons: This is great for us, because there’s a million celebrities here. I always want to have people I can have a conversation with. So when I saw Horatio Sanz, who you just saw, was here, I’m like “I’m fascinated with this guy. I know how this will go, potentially.” So you want a mix of that with a couple [Charles] Barkley, Jimmy Kimmel guys.

You had an iPad in front of you during that interview, but it didn’t look you were looking at it. Do you do much prep for all of these?

I try not to prep, because I think it can ruin how it can go. Which is the opposite of a late-night show. I don’t want to have notes. If people think you’re looking at notes, and following some sort of script that you’ve laid out ahead of time, they check out a little bit. Especially if your eye contact is like [looks down] — I just think it’s bad. So what we’ve tried to create is a conversation. I’m right here.

You’ve been podcasting for many years now. But a lot of people just discovered podcasts last year, through “Serial.”

The “Serial” thing is great. You hear conflicting reports about how much people should be able to monetize podcasts. I think ESPN has had trouble monetizing it.

You said that more than a year ago. That’s still a problem?

Yes. Is that my fault? I don’t know. I think other people have had a lot of success monetizing it. I think for what ESPN does as a company — it’s a company that’s built toward selling bigger things. They have deals with a lot of sponsors, and their money is going to gravitate toward bigger properties that ESPN has.

The challenge for ESPN and a lot of other companies is trying to figure out how to keep those relationships, and also figuring out how to extend relationships, or create relationships with stuff that’s not Monday Night Football.

You’ve been podcasting for a while, and the money part seems like it has frustrated you the whole time. At some point do you think about bailing on the idea?

No, because they pay me a salary. It’s not like I have a percentage of what my podcast gets.

I do think, as a competitive person, the fact that we don’t have a sponsored studio yet is just perplexing to me. We shoot like 15 hours of TV in there. But I also don’t know anything about ad sales, and it’s probably a much more complicated landscape than I’m giving it credit for. But to me, that’s a no-brainer.

The format really lends itself to advertisers. When you watch TV, you check out during the commercials. In a podcast, you’re there. When I’m interviewing Horatio Sanz, I can stop midway through and say “I want to mention quickly blah blah blah” and then I’m back to the interview. It’s not like people are going to say “Ah, I gotta speed up [and skip the ad].”

Grantland looks like it’s getting more and more ambitious — you guys are doing a lot more video, you’re producing movies, and you have a TV show on ESPN now.

It’s weird that nobody gives us credit for this. I think we have the best multimedia site right now. I don’t even know who we’re competing with. I don’t mean to be conceited — we just do the most things.

I think the thing that gets us the most excited is just pushing, and seeing how many things we can do, and how the site can keep growing.

It’s a pivotal time for the site. At some point we’ve got to either start growing, or we have to figure out what’s going to happen.

So, about that. You have a contract that expires near the end of the year.

I do.

We just talked about all the things you’re doing. Do you think you could go off by yourself, or some place other than ESPN, and recreate all of this?

I don’t like the word “recreate.” That doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. Grantland has been the most important thing I’ve done now for five years. Everything I’ve done for the last five years has been geared toward the site. I think it’s a business. The frustrating thing is you have to keep growing to have a business. You can’t just say “Okay — we’re good, after three years — we don’t need more people.”

I just think Grantland’s at a crucial point now where we’re doing the site that we have now really, really well. And that’s been the case now for about 14 months. So now the question is, what does that mean to ESPN? I don’t know. I don’t know that it’s a me decision — it’s what does ESPN want from this site? Because if they just want it to say the same, it’s going to stagnate a little bit.

It sounds like you’re asking ESPN to give you more resources.

I’m not doing anything. I haven’t asked for anything.

But when you do — it sounds like what you’re going ask them to do is to invest more in your property, and you.

I wouldn’t say that. That’s a decision that has to come from them. They just have to think about what the goals of the company are. The reality is they make billions of dollars with TV rights. It’s always good to dabble in different things. But sometimes when you dabble in different things, they turn into something. I think you have a responsibility at that point to decide “Alright — something happened here. This is a really good thing. Now what do we do?” That’s not my decision.

But you’ve made some suggestions, presumably, to [ESPN head] John Skipper and those folks.

No, I haven’t, actually. I haven’t had a lot of contact with those people since last September.

That was the Goodell thing. Does that experience influence your decision?

I don’t know. What I care about is the people I work with. Those are the people who know how much time we’ve put into everything. And we’ve never had … we’ve always been understaffed, always. We’ve had to pick certain people who are just overachieving, people that care about the product that we have. And, you know — at some point you want to have the right number of people, you want to start adding verticals and certain things. And if you’re not prepared to do that, I don’t know what’s left.

So that conversation has to happen first. And then you have to have a conversation afterward about me, and what I want to do. I still feel like I have five years left, where I can work at this pace. In five years I’m going to be 50, and I don’t know how hard I’m going to be able to work. I know how hard I work now. I don’t know if it’s going to be sustainable.

I think they take it for granted. Not just how hard I work, but how hard everybody works.

 
Interview with re/code from SXSW:

Bill Simmons, ESPN’s popular and controversial multimedia star ...

The format really lends itself to advertisers. When you watch TV, you check out during the commercials. In a podcast, you’re there. When I’m interviewing Horatio Sanz, I can stop midway through and say “I want to mention quickly blah blah blah” and then I’m back to the interview. It’s not like people are going to say “Ah, I gotta speed up [and skip the ad].”

Does he really not know that the iPhone podcast app has a 15 second skip-ahead button? I guess maybe he's saying be can at least sneak in the name of the advertiser in the time it takes us to fumble for our phones?

 
Interview with re/code from SXSW:

Bill Simmons, ESPN’s popular and controversial multimedia star ...

The format really lends itself to advertisers. When you watch TV, you check out during the commercials. In a podcast, you’re there. When I’m interviewing Horatio Sanz, I can stop midway through and say “I want to mention quickly blah blah blah” and then I’m back to the interview. It’s not like people are going to say “Ah, I gotta speed up [and skip the ad].”

Does he really not know that the iPhone podcast app has a 15 second skip-ahead button? I guess maybe he's saying be can at least sneak in the name of the advertiser in the time it takes us to fumble for our phones?
For me, a podcast is a multi-tasking companion. I don't sit there and listen while not doing something else.

By the time I would even think about grabbing my device and skipping a short ad, it would be over.

Not sure if this is what he means. I will ad that as a capitalist, I'm not prone to complaining about ads in free media.

 
Interview with re/code from SXSW:

Bill Simmons, ESPN’s popular and controversial multimedia star ...

The format really lends itself to advertisers. When you watch TV, you check out during the commercials. In a podcast, you’re there. When I’m interviewing Horatio Sanz, I can stop midway through and say “I want to mention quickly blah blah blah” and then I’m back to the interview. It’s not like people are going to say “Ah, I gotta speed up [and skip the ad].”

Does he really not know that the iPhone podcast app has a 15 second skip-ahead button? I guess maybe he's saying be can at least sneak in the name of the advertiser in the time it takes us to fumble for our phones?
For me, a podcast is a multi-tasking companion. I don't sit there and listen while not doing something else.

By the time I would even think about grabbing my device and skipping a short ad, it would be over.

Not sure if this is what he means. I will ad that as a capitalist, I'm not prone to complaining about ads in free media.
I suppose I shouldn't complain about the ads either. But regardless, when he starts blathering about stamps I hit fast forward for a while.

 
I usually listen to podcasts when I'm driving so ad placement in the middle is something I would have to live with.

 
Shea Serrano with a fairly amusing piece today about weird movie bad guys. He left the Tooth Fairy (Manhunter) off the list but, in all fairness, he may not be old enough for that to have made an impact on him.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top