The Athletic ... any thoughts ...

That was my first thought when I saw the CFB site hires and Mandel tweeted out that picture of the team. A friend told me it looked like the Osmonds' kids were announcing the formation of a new band.

 

It's 5 bucks. If you are interested in intelligent writing, why wouldn't you subscribe?

 

That's kind of the reason I'm not giving them the card yet. If you can't find some veterans and minorities to join your CFB and CBK sites than you aren't really trying. And I can't in good conscience support a venture that doesn't consider a diverse team a priority in its initial build.

 

In addition to Phil Taylor, the Bay Area site's first two hires were Japanese-American and African-American columnists. And I saw Chantel Jennings (formerly of ESPN) wrote an entertaining oral history of Harbaugh's Saved By The Bell appearance for the national CFB site.

I haven't looked at the roster across the nation, but I don't think the diversity criticism holds up. However, if what you're after is for a new site to assume that unknown and unproven writers are the way to attract readership, you're probably not going to be fulfilled there.

 

Ehh, yes and no. Simmons brought along a bunch of Grantland people to the Ringer. And every unknown voice Simmons hired sounded just like him: A young kid, generally disdainful of the idea of interviewing people for his stories because he's been trained to think the entire world should be viewed thru the prism of when he started paying attention. Emphasis on "young." Simmons doesn't like older writers.

The irony of course, is that Simmons cried--and is still crying--about how he never got a chance to break into the big bad Boston media world b/c The Establishment never allowed him in. What's he done other than create his own Establishment?

 

Simmons' ventures have been very bad at drawing eyeballs too, right? He might think those voices are young and fresh and just what the world needs, but the world doesn't seem to see it that way.

That's a nice luxury to have when your funding model is to draw from TV revenues. It doesn't work when your model is to get people to pay. In the local markets, people will pay for a lot of these guys because they're known quantities.

 

There is no way a subscription site could fill its roster with new young talent. No one's gonna pay for it unless they recognize the names.

 

I subscribed, mainly just to support the venture (though I'll read a lot of the CFB and Warriors stuff).

I've gotten to where if I at least semi-regularly read your content online, I'm going to pay you for it, even if you offer some or all of it for free. I read a lot on SI.com, so I subscribed to the magazine (seldom open it). I also have subscribed to the online NY Times, Washington Post and LA Times in the past year.

 

Not all recognizable talent is old. Easily could have hired a smart analytics guy like Bill Connelly or one of the PFF guys and I'd bet more people would pay to subscribe for that than a generalist former USA Today columnist.