The Athletic keeps growing .......

So, there are a bunch of different things to know, but the most relevant right now: The bottom three teams in the EPL get relegated to the Championship, the confusingly named second division of English football. (This year, Swansea City, West Brom, and Stoke.) The top two teams in the Championship—this year Wolves, a storied team that have been too long absent from the top division, and Cardiff City—earn automatic promotion.

Championship sides three through six play in a four-team playoff for the final EPL spot. Two teams play each other twice, home and away; the two winners on aggregate advance to a single playoff match for the final spot in the EPL. It's considered the world's richest game, because promotion is worth $220 million or so.

We're already down to the final two. This year, on May 26, Fulham—a great little London club with maybe the best stadium in the game—and Aston Villa—the kings of Birmingham—will play each other. You should watch that game. Your love will be made complete.

 

"the most relevant right now" should be the title of a weekly soccer column.

 

No, but I think it's indicative of a trend. That the proverbial canyon between ESPN and everyone else isn't as wide as we might be led to believe, and that all-important brand identity ESPN loves to beat its chest about and ram down our throats isn't as powerful as it used to be. Today's consumer prioritizes speed over everything else, and doesn't care about "conversation setting" as much as we think they do. ESPN doesn't get this. Legacy media in general is struggling with this. ESPN still thinks they are very necessary. Don't even get me started with the flaming plane wreck they're calling "Get Up!"

I cut the cord back in December, I have the cheap $25 package on Sling TV that gives me Turner and NBC Sports. I thought I'd miss ESPN but I don't.

 

I subscribe. I live somewhere other than where they teams I follow play, and so I’m hoping this replicates the local sports section for me. I have some gripes—lack of box scores, absence of reliable day-to-day coverage—but it’s not bad for a couple bucks a month. The Mets beat guy, in particular, is pretty good—very analysis heavy coverage, which is what I’m looking for—although I’m sure with the number of people on their payroll now (and small editing staff) the quality varies wildly from team to team.

 

I subscribe to the Athletic. I follow Denver sports teams and the Denver Post is normally my go-to place for Denver sports, not the Athletic, mostly because the Post will have coverage of the University of Colorado. I use the Athletic to read about other teams outside the Denver market. I could probably find most of that material, or something similar, on the internet somewhere but for five dollars a month the Athletic is a nice, convienent reference.

 

I subscribe to The Athletic. I could live without the pseudo-advertisements "Why I joined the Athletic." Very self-serving.

 

I’m curious as to how their management thought to make this mandatory (or at least suggested).

 

Kudos, Athletic, for this cutting edge humor. Lot to be proud of.

 

While I agree the spin is a little odd, I do like getting to know a little bit about the background of the person who will be covering the team.

 

I agree, lcjjdhn. Introducing the writers is great -- like the old "Letter from the Publisher" in SI. But the testimonials to the greatness of the product remind me a little of Trump's cabinet members going around the table to say how great it is to work from the president.

 

A new soccer section launched today promising "exclusive content for the U.S. national teams (USMNT and USWNT), El Tri, the Premier League, La Liga, the Champions League, and MLS teams, with more leagues and teams coming soon."

Editors are George Quraishi and Brooks Peck. Writers include Paul Tenorio, Graham Hunter, Caitlin Murray and Paolo Bandini. I don't follow it enough to evaluate those names, but it looks like a pretty strong foray into an underserved and enthusiastic U.S. fan base.