Selena Roberts back page debut for SI (new column on Pg. 2)

It seemed like she was trying to contrast the images of Belichick and Manning. It might have been a more logical column to use Coughlin and Belichick.

I have read some fine post Super Bowl columns all of which would have been better than what is on the back of SI.

Here is one from Harvey Araton that would have been perfect:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/sports/football/05araton.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

 

This definitely happens, I believe. It's less about hiring a good fit for your staff or searching for someone who can bring it then being able to hire the guy/gal that you and Dan McGrath/Bill Dwyre/Emilio Garcia-Ruiz were marveling over last March. (Sports editor names picked at random - have no idea if those guys are like that or not).

 

Agree. She was rushed to the majors when she needed at least another season at the Double-A level.

 

Came across this column from Selena on SI.com. In my estimate it would have been a much better column to put on the back of SI.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/selena_roberts/02/06/belichick/index.html

 

Dwyre, in my limited dealings with him, is a douchenozzle capable of irrigating the Sinai.

 

Wait a second: Are you saying the New York Times is Double-A? Or was that sarcasm?

 

Agreed.

 

I'm assuming the implication was that she was jumped to the NYT too soon.

 

I can't vouch for the Double-A reference. I referred to the kid-glove level, where there was so much gushing over her prose that she became largely unedited (had to be, for some of the overwrought metaphors to survive a desking). That can happen anywhere, whether moving too soon up a career ladder or just going from a rummy reporter whose stuff gets properly handled to somebody's "star" who suddenly can write no wrong. I'm just someone who thinks everyone should get edited and occasionally saved from themselves -- and I'm a career-long writer, not a desker.

We tend to feed certain egos in this biz while gladly stomping others. And it's all subjective as hell.

 

And Joe, that issue becomes even more nettlesome as the Internet, with theoretically no space limits, becomes the main info carrier.

 

Didn't read the column. Unsubscribed as soon as Rielly left.

Anyway, didn't he have the big benefit of everyone and their mother writing and emailing story ideas for the last decade?

Not to say he wasn't a great writer. I love his work. But he must get better story ideas than anyone in the biz.

 

Can't understand people who dropped their subscription because of Reilly's departure. Do you mean you were paying whatever you were paying solely for the 90 seconds a week it took you to read Reilly? If that's all you wanted you could have read it at the newsstand and put it back on the rack for free.