Grantland so far

I agree that Grantland's best work has been better. There's not even a question about that; Weinreb alone wins this contest. (For what it's worth, I think we're at an impasse on Brian Phillips.) But I've found almost all the writing on The Classical to be worth reading, while I don't like three-quarters of the stuff on Grantland. With The Classical, I am forced to wade through an occasional soccer article. With Grantland, I am forced to wade through piles of pop-culture writing, half-baked statistical analysis and the occasional soccer article. And I don't like any of their weekly sports columns (by Phillips, Katie Baker, Bill Barnwell and John Brandon, who I would say is the worst of the bunch).

The comparison of "Best of" lists isn't fair, as The Classical has been around for something like a month and a half. But here are some standout pieces (in rough order of preference):

1. "Baseball's White Rabbit" by Paul Flannery - A profile of former Red Sox and Expos pitcher Bill Lee
2. "Defending the Realm" by Avi Korne - A preview of Antonio Margarito's fight with Miguel Cotto
3. "Hall of Nothing" by Eric Nusbaum - Why the Baseball Hall of Fame's selection process sucks the fun out of the sport
4. "Sick in the Head" by Sean Conboy - About concussions and the NFL
5. "The Commissioner Disappears" by Bethlehem Shoals - A quick reaction to the Lakers-Hornets-Rockets trade fail
6. "The Archetype: Dane Sanzenbacher Agonistes" by Pete Segall - On undersized, white wide receivers

 

"Sick in the Head" was the story that jumped out at me when I looked at this site earlier in the day.

But I think using "Looney Tunes" and making Harrison seem like the goofy village idiot after 100 words took some of the seriousness out of the story for me. Also, did this writer ever call or talk to anyone before writing this? It seem like it was more a stringing together of a bunch of internet links into a story. A story that has a good point and really made me think, but it really seemed half finished.

I think going to a local high school, college and maybe a pro team to ask about the special helmet Harrison received would have completed the story.

I know these guys do not have the resources of Grantland, but there is not one quote gained by the writer in that entire story. Maybe that is nitpicking, but that is the way I see it.

Also, they need to have links pop into new pages. I don't like clicking back and forth to the page once I click the link. This board does a great job of doing that.

 

Right click?

 

I don't think it's entirely a resources issue. The story wasn't built around the quotes, and it was meticulously researched. And most articles on Grantland don't feature any original reporting, either. The writing was strong and the subject was interesting, in my opinion. And Harrison is a cartoon; that's kind of the point.

 

I know, but why should I have to do that every time? Plus, you are automatically directing people away from your page.

 

Not being snarky, but what would you have done if that story came across your desk?

 

It's a matter of the publication. If that story was submitted by a freelancer to my newspaper, I'd ask where he got off thinking he could editorialize so much as a freelancer. But we don't ever run stories like this. I wish we did on occasion.

Clearly, Conboy was asked to write a column for a website with a particular spin on the sports world. I thought it worked for its purpose exceedingly well. There is no doubt in my mind this could have run on Grantland. It did run on Deadspin.

In addition, it's not like this is some 17-year-old in his bedroom 800 miles from Pittsburgh who has never been in a high school football locker room. Conboy is the sports editor for Pittsburgh magazine, and he covers some, if not all, Steelers and Penguins home games.

 

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on that.

 

Nobody would argue there has been really good stuff on Grantland. But, then, there should be, given the lineup of writers. ESPN can probably absorb the cost of Grantland sufficiently for now.

I didn't have lofty "National" expectations for the site when I wrote the initial post to this thread. I supposed I expected creativity and hustle. Instead of developing the roster it started with, so to speak, Grantland has merely hired every big name that would sign on, and let them loose.

 

The Pierce article on Tebow is a perfect example of Grantland's weakness, actually. He goes after some really provocative ideas in that essay and the last three paragraphs are an utter disaster, the kind that make folks who really know religion - which Pierce likes to think he knows, and I suspect does from the social/cultural/material perspective that informs modern Catholicism - smirk.

And I have no idea if Pierce has an editor who can say "well, Charlie, so long as you're quoting verses at the top of the column, you might want to acknowledge that Tebow's point about God's authority are verses, too: Romans 13:1-7." So instead of Pierce taking a pointless potshot at Tebow for being biblically accurate - and I'm guessing Pierce knows those verses, and thus can't be charged with ignorance - he can instead critique something else. Pierce would never make that big of a mistake, say, on the intricacies of a third-down conversion in football - and an editor wouldn't let him. But on what I'm guessing is the most read piece in Grantland other than Simmons stuff, there's a huge oversight. Much can be written about Tebow's faith - and critiques can be levied. But you can't pass Tebow off as a dummy. Or his Dad. Or, however I hate his politicization of faith, James Dobson. On religious matters, I assure you: They're Pierce's intellectual equal and more.

Pierce, in other words, takes the time to unpack some dangerous stuff - sola fide vs. works righteousness, Tebow's testimony being surprisingly politicized - and just punts it with a Bill Maher attitude at the end. And when I talk about creativity and hustle, I mean, really, rigor, willingness to live in the tension of the subject and not be so damn settled on everything. Grantland seems so airless to me. I think it's a posture, mainly, based on a modern thought pattern of zeroing in on rankings and lists and "known" ideas vs. "unknown" big questions.

 

But did he note that he throws the ball like a junior college backup?

 

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7443714/jonah-lehrer-concussions-adolescents-future-football

I always thought if I had a son, they would play football. Now, I don't think so. My wife works with a lot of brain injured clients, and she is very sensitive to this concussion issue.

I like the angle of pro football being taken down at the high school level first.