Why Does the Sports Guy Even Bother to Write about Boston?
Fig Jam.
I’ve bitched about this before, but apparently the management as ESPN has not gotten the message. How they can possibly allow Bill Simmons to continue to destroy his credibility as a sports writer is beyond me. ESPN is giving him a national platform to do basically nothing but talk about how much he loves Boston sports (oh – and how much he talks about Boston sports with his dad). His column has digressed to the point that he is just a blithering idiot, “writing” a sports piece about a team while admittedly being one of its biggest fans.
Imagine for a second that you are a Chicago Bulls fan today, and you go to ESPN.com and see that the headline of the entire ESPN page is Simmons’ article about Rajon Rondo’s foul of Brad Miller in last night’s game (and other stuff, some of which is sort of interesting). At this point, your best bet is to just start repeatedly punching yourself in the nuts. Punching you in the nuts is the one thing that ESPN.com can’t figure out a way to have Simmons physically do to the non-Boston sporting world, so they need your help with that part. While you are doing to yourself what ESPN and Simmons are trying to do, you decide to read the article. You find passages like this:
So when Rondo walloped Miller across the face on that climactic drive Tuesday night, it was his single smartest play of his phenomenal first round. He had no chance of blocking the shot, and he had to hit Miller as hard as he could to prevent the and-one, so screw it … SMACK! (He even admitted this after the game.) Since the motion technically looked like Rondo was swiping at the ball — even though his hand wasn’t within two feet of it — the officials couldn’t call a flagrant and that was that. If Bulls fans want to whine about it, fine, just remember that (A) Boston’s best clutch guy (Ray Allen) fouled out on two of the worst calls of the playoffs, and (B) Ben Gordon stepped out of bounds right as he got fouled by Tony “Why Am I In The Game Again?” Allen for three game-tying free throws in the final 30 seconds. Sweeping incompetence will eventually even out over time.
Huh? the whole, “If Bulls fans want to whine…” bit is a fantastic piece of journalism. Especially when followed up by the determination that Ray Allen’s fouls were the “worst calls of the playoffs” and the absolute statement that Ben Gordon stepped out of bounds late in the game (weird, because in the game I was watching, the TV crew couldn’t decide whether Gordon had stepped out of bounds or not). I mean, maybe he did step out of bounds, but how is that relevant to whether or not Rondo’s foul was flagrant? It sounds like an argument between two people who went to rival schools. Those arguments always devolve to the point of yelling about stupid shit like that. But in Simmons case, he’s not even arguing with anyone. He’s pointing stuff like that out despite being the only voice. Such is his opinion on how awesome the Celtics are and how futile it is to oppose them.
This sweet writing is followed up with:
1. Congratulating himself for predicting that the Celtics / Bulls Series would be the best series.
2. Making fun of Bulls center Brad Miller for his actions after taking Rondo’s ‘wallop.’
3. This sentence, “Kendrick Perkins’ dead-on impersonation of Robert Parish in Game 5 — 16 points, 19 rebounds, seven blocks — made me so proud that I can’t even tell you.”
and 4. Calling for Rajon Rondo to be inducted into the Hall of Fame with this passage:
Rondo has now passed the oranges, the reds and the greens and moved toward Park Place and Boardwalk on the Monopoly board of point guards. Only a handful of guys in history can match what he did in these first five games (he’s averaging a 24-10-10 with three steals a night, and that only starts to tell the story); he won’t allow the Celtics to lose these games, displayed a real mean streak (just ask Brad Miller) and was electrically exciting to boot. I don’t know what’s left.
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Bill Simmons. The guy who ESPN has write about the NBA.
It’s even more ridiculous if you look at the piece that John Hollinger wrote today, also analyzing the foul. Hollinger uses “statistical analysis” and runs through the various scenarios when discussing the foul. Hollinger further explains how the foul’s designation as a non-flagrant foul meant that Miller had to take the FT’s (because if he hadn’t the Celtics could have chosen the FT shooter), whereas had the refs called it a flagrant, the Bulls could have designated a player to shoot the FT’s. It’s a very interesting read, without the whole, ”yeah…. well we got screwed on a earlier call so there,” bit.
Now, I get that Simmons used to be awesome. He used to write about insightful topics and do so in a way that was entertaining and thought provoking like few other writers could. Occasionally he remembers that he used to do all this and pens a piece about something irrellevant that suddenly seems meaningful and interesting. But for the most part, all he does is talk about Boston sports (and again, how his dad feels about Boston sports). They should create a special Boston-centric internet (www.douchebags.bos seems like a good domain to start with) and let him spew forth his Boston rhetoric for all to read. That would be fine. But on ESPN.com? Really?
Loading ...
BIll Simmons is not a Journalist/sports writer! He writes from the fan perspective. He happens to be a Boston fan. You know this from word one. There are 7 other people writing on the NBA for ESPN.com. He just happens to have the most unique /entertaining writing style of the group.
Your critique is lazy and rambles. What does Hollinger have to do with Simmons other than ESPN?
If you have a problem with the foul write about the foul not a boston fan’s reaction to the foul, which is about as predictable as it gets.
Don’t get me wrong you do good stuff here, journalism critiques are not your forte, however
That’s your love of Sport’s Guy from like 3 years ago talking. Simmon’s is called the “Sport’s Guy,” not the “Boston Guy” and writes for the biggest sports organization in the world, not the Boston Globe. If I want to read about why it was ok for Rondo to punch Brad Miller because of all the “yeah but’s” that Boston fans have (yeah but Ben Gordon stepped out of bounds…. yeah but Ray Allen totally got jobbed), I’ll go to a Celtics blog.
On ESPN.com, I want to read about the sporting event from the perspective of some of the most talented sports writers in the country.
My critique is lazy? So what? I’m lazy. I write on a Seattle sport’s based blog for fun.
What does Hollinger have to do with it? Well, he covered the game (and the incident in question) by opining that it probably was a flagrant, by pointing out why Miller had to stay in the game to shoot the FT’s, by examining the percentage difference chance the Bull’s would have had if the foul was a flagrant…. and basically by writing a better article about the situation without blowing the Celtics (or Bulls) in the process. That’s what Hollinger had to do with it.
I don’t have a problem with the foul, I have a problem with a writer calling himself the “Sports Guy” writing sentences like, “If Bulls fans want to whine about it, fine, just remember that (A) Boston’s best clutch guy (Ray Allen) fouled out on two of the worst calls of the playoffs, and (B) Ben Gordon stepped out of bounds right as he got fouled by Tony “Why Am I In The Game Again?” Allen for three game-tying free throws in the final 30 seconds.”
umm.. thanks for the comment?
I’ve stopped reading The “Sports” Guy. He used to be one the favorite parts of my week, but I just can’t stand reading about Boston anymore! It would be different if he was a regional writer, but last time I checked ESPN was a national platform. Before Boston started winning everything he would slip in a plea for mercy every now and again, or perhaps mention a particularly good or bad Boston performance, but now that Boston wins everything he is totally unreadable. I’ll take a Hotdog and Friends article any day of the week.
Would you settle for just one Hotdog and Friends article a week?
Simmons is a columnist so he can write on whatever he wants. “Whatever he wants” just used to be more appealing to everyone outside the state of Massachusetts. He now lacks variety. Just like Hotdog and Friends lacks daily article updates… friendly jab! Friendly jab!
I guess we have to…right?
I tend to agree with Jon. You have to take his blatant Boston homerism as part of what he does…the guy wrote a book about the regional mutual masturbatory event that was the 04 World Series, and it was pretty much just his columns cut and pasted together (so I’ve heard). I don’t think he’s trying to pretend that he’s objective or neutral. I skip his columns about Boston most the time (1 out of 4?) but that’s just the package–it goes hand in hand with “I hate Joakim Noah”. It’s not like he writes the game recap. He’s a columnist.
the collumns are ok nobody wants to hear about new england sports when they are winning all the time. But the BS report is my favorite podcast by far. And its not really the boston, its the fact that it just sounds like a conversation between people without all the typical sports talk yelling and overproduction and arguing.
See jeremy green, wilbon, mike and mike, or just about any other cast that the world wide leader has.
I think we can all agree that Sports Guy became annoying when New England fans became annoying (you can debate when this happened for you).
But the fact of the matter is this: Red Sox fans used to be tragic figures. Everyone (except Yanks fans) pulled for them a little bit. Now they are obnoxious, drunken idiots that shout down children at Mariners games.
http://hotdogandfriends.com/2008/07/22/red-sox-games-where-grown-men-shout-at-little-kids/
http://hotdogandfriends.com/2008/05/28/red-sox-fans-are-awesome/
This makes Simmons a DBA – douchebag by association. It’s a tough pill to swallow for him, because I did love his stuff. But them’s the breaks.
Fig Jam!
I could not agree with you more. I liked his column last week about the series as a whole, but his recent column is complete crap. I wonder what b.s. he is going to drudge up in reaction to last night’s thrilling and historical game? You are right, his homerism belongs on a different platform, not ESPN. ESPN already caters to the NYC-BOS rivalry enough. I mean, how sick would you be if Jay Bilas was that big of a homer and wrote that way about Duke? He’d be the most hated guy on The Network. Two other thoughts: Jason Smith’s NBA podcast is better than Bill Simmons’ NBA “coverage and two, Bill Simmons will lose relevance when the Boston teams begin to suck again (starting very soon my friend). I don’t think people will read his pouting columns about losing after his city has had the greatest success of one team in a decade that I can recall. (3 SB’s, 2 WS’s, 1 NBA Champ. and the Bruins are very, very good this year).
If you have a valid critique it is with ESPN, but remember the E stands for ENTERTAINMENT, which is focussed on now more than ever. Nowhere is he packaged as objective, or who you should read for NBA coverage. He writes about the NBA because he likes the sport. The reason he is on the front page is he is by far the most read person on the side and its not close. If you don’t like his style don’t click on his fat face. Read: JA Adande, or Chad Ford, or Ric Bucher or, David Thorpe, or Marc Stein, or the above mentioned Hollinger. Simmons may be a DBA but you shouldn’t care unless he’s your only source of news. This aint a local newspaper with one or two columnists.
A guy (cough, Kowalski, cough) who hails from the Seattle area who is a devout Seattle sports fan but roots for the Red Sox, the Cubs, the Bears, probably the Nationals and the Fighting Illini (let’s not forget to mention he most likely owned a Yankees hat and a Raiders Starter jacket in middle school) has no credibility to discuss about objectivity and fandom in general.
I have to side with Jon here. Simmons has his schtick. It’s not his job to be objective. Yes, Simmons is past his prime, but he still moves the needle. Kowalski, Tim Hardaway hates you.
I no longer read Simmons because all he talks about is the Boston perspective. I don’t take issue with his columns, I just don’t read them. Is that what ESPN wants to hear? No, so perhaps they should tell him to ditch the angle. The national fanbase is fickle.
your an idiot you sit here and bitch because people follow the sports guy and the most popular thing you have is your article bashing simmons so i would rather hear from a guy who lives in la and roots for boston rather than someone who gets people to hear from them by bashing other writers…. congrats your famous off tsg