Move over Roger Bannister, Muhammad Ali and Arthur Ashe, Dwyane Wade in da house

Speaking of ESPN, tonight's SportsCenter was hilarious. Stuart Scott's studio gangster personality is turning into comedy . It's like driving past a car accident, you have to turn and look. It's amazing no one over at Bristol is telling this guy to stop.

 

It was his Al Haig "i'm in charge "moment gone bad.

 

I too came into the sports biz with a stunning lack of sports knowledge, which forced me to ask and learn and ask and listen and ask and read....and never, ever, pretend I knew something when I didn't.

Sports fans always know when you're pretending, and that's what the Wade thing feels like.....pretending that the Sportsman winner is not a function of marketing, on some level.

I do respectfully disagree with Jones about the cardinal sin of writing over the heads of your audience. I think the sin is writing beneath them.....it takes just one shallow statement for a savvy reader to flick you across the room like a booger. I'd rather challenge them by raising the bar on the subject, than annoying them by pandering. (ie, see yesterday's discussion on whether an Elmo anecdote was appropriate as the lead of a Jets' beat report in the NY Times.)

But I agree completely that the folks making the final decisions about editorial and marketing issues absolutely must have a deep understanding of the landscape and history and nuances of sport...because the fans sure do, and they expect nothing less from us.

 

Re: Move over Roger Bannister, Muhammad Ali and Arthur Ashe, Dwyane Wade in da h

And not a thing wrong with Olive Garden. Exquisite garden salad.

 

Re: Move over Roger Bannister, Muhammad Ali and Arthur Ashe, Dwyane Wade in da h

To add to Jones' insightful points:

The best editors -- like the best coaches -- are the ones who put their writers in position to be successful. Whether that means making the right decisions on content, on style, or on philosophic direction, an editor must be trusted to make those right decisions, and put their writers in the right positions, so that everyone can prosper.

However, if an editor doesn't have the right skill-set to make those decisions, there's no way in hell that the writers can be successful. Ultimately, the writers are dependent on the editor much more than the editor is dependent on the writer.

Because while a writer can learn before he writes, an editor has to know and, more than that, to understand -- understand not only what's been written, but why it's being written, and, hopefully, how it can be written better.

An editor doesn't have to be a good writer. That's not his job.

A writer, however, can't do his job if the editor can't put him in the right position.

It's a shame if that's the case at SI.

 

Re: Move over Roger Bannister, Muhammad Ali and Arthur Ashe, Dwyane Wade in da h

McDonell also edited ESQUIRE, so let's not make him into some celebrity-addled lightweight, either. And his tenure at SI has been fairly solid.
The best editors let their writers find the best position in which to be successful and then get the fuck out of the way.
And, holy crap, Mark Fucking Mulvoy? The guy who didn't know enough about writing to throw to a cat? The yob in the polyester pants who changed the magazine from a writer-driven giant to a braindead fanzine, who handed it over to anonymous drones to edit, the guy who had, well, issues about pro basketball because of its demographic makeup, the guy who FIRST broke down the wall between advertising, marketing, and editorial, the guy who brought us most of the elements about SI that this board excoriates on a regular basis, the living walking breathing demonstration of the Peter Principle?
THAT Mark Mulvoy?
Jesus wept.

 

For whatever it's worth, Price's SOTY piece is exponentially better than Pierce's on Brady last year. Pierce is one of the best, but I recall it being very forced, partly because Brady is a relatively boring subject. The Wade story was really good. Maybe it's all been told before, and maybe it's the stereotypical NBA-player-with-rough-background story, but I wasn't aware of the details.

 

Fenian - You need to listen to cut on WFAN - Terry did himself or SI no favors.

 

Rags -
I guess I should've used the quote-function on Moger, because that's who I was responding to.

 

Boom - thanks for the link, that radio interview was great. Peter Principle in action. This is the top guy at SI?

 

"YES is letting us know that the incorrect spelling came from your website".

Thanks for confirmation that the emperor has no clothes. But SI is still good if I want the dish on player's latest tats.