When Sportswriting Goes Bad

It may surprise some readers, but when I'm not watching random horror movies, I sometimes take in an occasional sporting match. And like any other warm-blooded American male, I like to read about sports. For the last five or six years, Bill Simmons, ESPN's "The Sports Guy" had been one of my favorites. Well, my friends, that's all over.

In reality my interest began to wane maybe a year and a half ago, a year, something like that. Whatever, Simmons still wrote some stuff every once in a while that I could get behind and appreciate.

But this week, a week in which he put out two pretty sizable pieces, I've decided that I no longer like Bill Simmons, and won't be reading any of his future columns. To illustrate why this is the breaking point, I offer just a couple of organized, rational points:

1. Simmons writing, because it is so infrequent at this point and because he doesn't spend half as much time following sports as he claims to, has become less and less timely and more and more irrelevant. Case in point, his piece from Tues or Weds about the Suns. Seriously? This is a topic that has been written on ad nauseum at ESPN! Many, many, many blogs have talked about the Suns much more eloquently and more immediately, yet Simmons's writing about it as if he's breaking new ground.

2. In this same piece he makes CONSTANT references to the 80's Celtics and Lakers. You know what? I get it, those teams were good. But the last time I checked, that was 20 fucking years ago. Jesus Christ. I challenge someone to find a basketball column written by Simmons ever in which he doesn't mention one of those two teams (Bird's Celtics and Magic's Lakers). I fucking dare you, because I doubt it can be done.

3. Let's get down to the real meat and potatoes though, shant we? In his most recent piece, where he discusses the Patriots (really, that's weird, he never writes about them!), Simmons compares the Pats to the Yankees.

On the surface, this is a pretty crappy argument, or at least a very lazy argument, but it's in his reasoning that I really lose all respect for the man. Basically, he asserts that because the Patriots' story lines are so played out, non-fans are starting to hate them. (This is a drastic simplification, I know, but I couldn't even stand to finish the piece, so too bad).

Here's the problem, the number one offender in this regard, is the SAME FUCKING CORPORATION THAT SIGNS HIS FUCKING CHECKS! I mean, really, Bill, really? How in the name of god can he look in the mirror and take himself seriously at this point? I'm going to guess, by the headline of the article, and remember, I stopped about a third of the way in, that Bill wants to bitch about how "hate" became such a strong part of sports.

Now I come from Philadelphia, so that shit's built into us from day one, particularly for the Braves and the Cowboys. But I would argue, and it's not a hard argument to make, that ESPN is the single entity most responsible for generating hatred for x, y or z among fans. With their incessant idolization, and their sappy, poorly produced features and their idiotic, talking-head commentators, ESPN pushes tired story lines, 24 hours a day until the only emotion we can respond with is hate. There's just no other way. Well Bill, you're part of the fucking problem. So shut the fuck up.

4. Did I mention that the Sports Gal has an archives page now?! I didn't? Well, she does, in a sports column. Awesome huh? I wonder what quirky trend, already played out in the blogosphere, she's going to dazzle us with today!

5. Finally, some folks will argue, and it's a fair argument, that Bill Simmons laid the ground work for blogging, and a new kind of sports journalism, with his witty pop-culture references. You know what though, pop-culture isn't static, it moves. And while it has continued to move, and at a rapidly increasing rate, Simmons continues to reference the same TIRED ass movies, shows, bands, etc. He still talks about Pearl Jam. (Sorry, you might need Insider for that one, but trust me, Pearl Jam.) He made a reference to Godfather II today. Move the fuck on! And yes, I realize that sometimes he'll talk about new shows, like the Wire or Friday Night Lights. But it's usually just to mention that they're good or that folks should be watching them.

When he's actually writing, and leaning on these references, which is quite often, they're always from one of a handful of movies or shows that, for the most part, weren't all that great to begin with. The saddest part, at least from my perspective, is when he prints actual emails from "actual readers" and they reference the same shitty stuff. He's created a language around sports, that in my opinion anyway, is stupider and more simplistic than real sports dialogue can and should be.

I'll stop there, but believe me, I could go on. This is really all an offshoot of the whole "ESPN-has-ruined-sports" arguement that's been gaining some steam lately. The saddest part though, is that it wasn't all that long ago that Simmons was the freshest and strongest voice in sportswriting. Now, he's no better than any other bogus ESPN personality. Of course the only way things are going to change is if people stop visiting ESPN.com, and I just don't see that happening anytime soon. I can still hope though, and if that doesn't work, at least we'll always have Jason Whitlock.