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. Versatile

    Versatile Active Member

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2014
  2. jr/shotglass

    jr/shotglass Well-Known Member

    Yeah, AdBlock eliminates all of those for me, too.
     
  3. 21

    21 Well-Known Member

    Loved this piece on the Red Sox meltdown, putting it here instead of the Red Sox thread because I have one question about the footnotes: Why are these footnotes and not part of the actual story?

    http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7095696/the-collapse-red-sox

    Footnotes:
     
  4. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    Because DFW used footnotes.
     
  5. Double Down

    Double Down Well-Known Member

    I actually like the way it sets off the most specific part of Schur's rage.
     
  6. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    Probably way more of a Simmons influence than DFW, actually.

    Just seems to be a common stylistic device these days in this kind of freewheeling sports writing.
     
  7. Double Down

    Double Down Well-Known Member

    I don't think it's common at all, really. I think it's a signature feature of Grantland stories, that they've decided it's part of their house style, and Posnanski uses it (but with asterisks instead of numbers) in his blog. That's about it.
     
  8. Bubbler

    Bubbler Well-Known Member

    The footnotes made that piece.
     
  9. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    Sepinwall does it in his TV columns, though I guess that's not sports. But he's someone I regularly read, probably helping it to seem common.

    I guess we're quibbling over what "common" means. Do I think that more than 50 percent of writers use footnotes? No. Do I think it's somewhat of a trend? Yes. I like it better than parentheticals, though.
     
  10. 21

    21 Well-Known Member

    It first struck me as a little too cute/Deadspinish, but I guess in keeping with the format of the site, it works.
     
  11. Ben_Hecht

    Ben_Hecht Active Member


    Agree 1000%.

    What a sniveling, bloodless insect -- and that's giving him all the best of it.
     
  12. Versatile

    Versatile Active Member

    http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/6601/reconsidering-sebastian-janikowski

    Insight into the Grantland editorial process?

    Mr. Simmons has a whim, and now, instead of cloaking it in a one-paragraph response to a fake mailbag question getting to it in a column weeks later, he has one of his minions write it that day. (Edited to remove what was apparently taken as slander.)

    Also, there's an egregious factual error: "Of the players taken after Janikowski in the first two rounds ... only one — Keith Bulluck — went to the Pro Bowl."

    Umm... Wikipedia makes this process really easy. But what's worse is Mays acknowledged that Shaun Alexander was taken two picks after Janikowski one paragraph earlier.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page