Rick Reilly leaves Sports Illustrated - now confirmed by NYT

Bullshit. Stupid.

He throws a crumb to a basement blog, and it JUST HAPPENED to be the blog most talked about on this site and in sports journo circles?

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

 

Oh, puhleeze. This is a demimonde. We talk about Boots all the time, but Reiily is blissfully ignorant of such. Emphasis on "blissfully"

 

another day, another choice:

island yadda yadda 6 months: Reilly or Jemele?

 

I think they replace Reilly with a single guy. Sports journalism is too personality-driven these days not to -- SI needs a face as much as anything. I also think they'll be tempted to hire a guy like Leitch, to try to swing "younger and hipper" but I hope that ultimately they fill that spot with an honest-to-goodness reporter and writer.

They already have S.L. Price in house... Maybe it's time for him to make the Reilly move, from features to columns. I don't know Scott personally, so I don't know if he would be into the idea, but he's the best writer they have, I think.

I'd say the same about Jeff MacGregor is he was still there.

If I were them, I'd probably take a look at Mark Kriegel as well.

I would guess Whitlock would get a look, although if SI hasn't approached him about anything up to this point (I mean, before Reilly's departure), it would surprise me to see them suddenly take a shot with him.

Pretty fun to think about it... I don't think, in the end, this will be a bad thing for SI. I think it looks bad right now, especially because of the gutting that's been going on there, but if they do this right, it could be the cannonball that rights the ship.

 

YOU'RE HIRED!

 

Or maybe the majority of people posting are in their 20s and didn't read SI prior to 1996.

 

I'm in my 20s and have been reading SI since before I learned to write in cursive. What's their excuse? Stupidity.

 

Well, good for you. But there's no reason to be an asshole.

You've got a good point there about bringing back the "Point After" but you're obscuring it with douchebaggery.

 

Reilly daring Sosa to pee in a cup was grandstanding, no question. He obviously wanted to provoke a reaction. But he also called Sosa on his own bullshit too, which to that point, no one was willing to do. Sosa said repeatedly that he'd take a drug test to prove he was clean. Reilly tried to take him up on that offer, if only to prove it was bullshit. To suggest that a little bit of grandstanding makes one of the most talented and respected people in our business a "pissant," and that a player should have "thrown him through a wall" in reaction to an interview shows very little respect for the way we do our jobs. And suggesting that the Sosa incident, and the onecolumn that it spawned, could be used to summerize Reilly's entire career ("he'll always be the pissant") shows very little understand of modern sports writing, and smells like something I'd read on a fan board.

That's why your post was stupid.

(Oops, that was two grafs. Drats. Perhaps this truly is the winter of our despair.)

 

Hurtful, dools. I don't really think I'm an SI kind of guy.

DICK TITS!

 

No football phone FOR YOU!

 

I don't think there's anything obscure about these posts. I'm right, and I'm an asshole. What's vague about that?