Grantland so far

I love the oral histories, read the Rockets one on my Blackberry.

 

Read it, it address' all of those things.

I enjoyed it, it is amazing what kind of power Stern had back then. Lifetime suspensions for one positive tests which could be reviewed after 2 years. Imagine trying to get that through the union theses days.

 

I don't like oral histories, so I wasn't going to read it anyway. But if those issues are addressed, particularly the one about Ralph Sampson not actually being that good even before his injuries, then how do you justify that headline?

 

How can it be an oral history if it's written down?

 

I took it as more of how good Sampson and them could have been then how good they were. I found it intereseting.

 

I thought it was a mess. They could have focused on one of four or five things, but wrote a mish mosh

 

For comparative purposes, here's an "oral history" in 700 words. By Michael Kruse. Tweeted around by Dave Kindred.

http://www.tampabay.com/features/humaninterest/wisdom-artist-frank-strunk-faces-void-left-by-mia-lucretia/1259586

 

So?

 

Did you assume the link was an indictment of your taste or something?

 

Norrin, don't pull your barbs so fast. You're mucho entertaining.

 

I know.

Good stuff here:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8942448/tournament-determine-worst-academy-award-moment-modern-history

 

Meh.