1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Grantland so far

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Alma, Jul 14, 2011.

  1. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    Me too.When we were staffing up for the SJ novel someone suggested "Pete" who at that point had about 27 posts. A lot of people seemed to know him. He became a great contributor to novel. The man knows his Presidential history.

    Pete is kind of like a bowl scout here at SJ. He travels below the radar but is very influential. Pete is a fixer also. If you need something done Pete is the go to guy. He is like the Harvey Keitel character- the Wolf in Pulp Fiction.
     
  2. Pete

    Pete Well-Known Member

    YF, I prefer to maintain an air of manufactured mystery. But if for some reason you want to know more, feel free to check out @MartyVanBuren on Twitter.
     
  3. jr/shotglass

    jr/shotglass Well-Known Member

    If you were @JimmyBuchanan, my interest would be piqued.
     
  4. Elliotte Friedman

    Elliotte Friedman Moderator Staff Member

    The Malcolm Gladwell piece today on the Brooklyn Nets was outstanding.
     
  5. Ben_Hecht

    Ben_Hecht Active Member


    Don't forget @FrankieImADrunkPierce
     
  6. Iron_chet

    Iron_chet Well-Known Member

    Agreed. That kind of article is what has me checking the site once a day.
     
  7. jr/shotglass

    jr/shotglass Well-Known Member

    Well, here's another one.

    I just think Mark Titus' relegation idea for college football is a fantastic, fascinating concept, even if it has absolutely no chance of ever happening.

    I get psyched every time I think about it. Look out ... I might ... hurl ...
     
  8. It was great until Gladwell started talking about marginal tax rates at the end and showed he was both naive and ignorant of economic and US history. According to Gladwell businessmen in the 1960's were happy to pay 90% marginal tax rates but rich guys today are pushy and out take all they can get.

    His naivety at the end make me wonder if Gladwell just crawled through the Atlantic Yards Report or spoke with Norman Order and passed off what could have been an interview covering the history of the real estate project as an article instead.
     
  9. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

    In what way is anything he says in that last paragraph wrong?
     
  10. He talks about businessmen in the 1960's not complaining about paying a 90% marginal tax rate in the 60's but in 1965 the rate was 70%. Somebody must have complained or else it never would have changed. To think otherwise is naive.

    Gladwell writes:
    As if Joe Kennedy Sr., John D. Rockerfeller and JP Morgan and other titans of business got their fortunes through luck and not being complete SOB's when it came to matters of money. Unbelievably naive for a supposedly smart guy.
     
  11. imjustagirl

    imjustagirl Active Member

    My brother got me hooked on Titus' blog. It's very hit or miss, but when he's on, I laugh out loud.
     
  12. jr/shotglass

    jr/shotglass Well-Known Member

    I'm very much looking forward to his book coming out in March. It's a Kindle must.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page