The demise of SI

I have to agree. I still look forward to getting Sports Illustrated in the mail every Wednesday, even if it's a little weaker than what it used to be. Still, Dan Patrick shouldn't be in the magazine unless he actually writes an article. I rarely give his page a look, and I usually flip by it. In the end, though, I'd rather read SI than a magazine that players have complete control over (ESPN).

 

I agree it's not what it once was but I stopped getting ESPN-The Magazine about a year ago (free subscription expired) and I haven't missed it at all. In fact, I'm happy to have that time back.

 

You're getting older. That's all.

98 percent of sports is a cliche to me. There really aren't that many different ways to execute a pick-and-roll or turn a double play or throw a pass over the middle. With few exceptions, nothing is "must see" to me because, well, I've probably seen it.

 

There was a time when I just had to read every word in SI.

Now I haven't seen an issue in five years and I sure don't feel as though I've missed a thing.

 

And stay off his lawn!

 

Maybe it's because I'm young, but I do enjoy the "big game" stories on Super Bowls, Final Fours, NBA Finals, golf majors, etc. I've seen those stories done very well in SI. There's usually good anecdotes and insight on things that were happening behind the scenes during the season that people didn't know about.

 

got the magazine yesterday and cringed at the Shaq cover, then turned immediately to the Virginia lacrosse story and then read the perfect game story. As a Blazer fan growing up near Portland, I started reading SI in the 70s and loved the NBA big-game coverage. loved all the big-event coverage through the years, actually. Still do, for the most part. I agree with others in that SI is not as good as it used to be but I don't think it's as bad as some make it out to be. The landscape has changed significantly for SI, as it has for us guys still putting out dead-tree bird-cage liners.

 

I was fine with Dan Patrick on TV or the radio, but his SI gig is ridiculous. It's not even a fresh Q & A...it's simply an excerpt from his radio show from that week.

 

I will say this: The upcoming iPad app has a lot of promise. Once it's finally released -- whenever that may be -- I'll really, really want to like it, even as I fear that the concept's execution will leave me wanting more. (And, of course, they can make the app as glitzy as they want -- but if the writing's subpar, I'll be disappointed.)

 

The thing about Sports Illustrated to me is, it's all about who wrote what. Frankly, if Chris Mannix or Pablo Torre or Austin Murphy or Albert Chen wrote a story, it's just not going to be as good as if Scott Price or Jon Wertheim or Gary Smith wrote a story. Sports Illustrated has loaded up on too many writers, and while all of those gentlemen would be exceptional beat reporters or columnists or even ESPN the Magazine writers, they're not fitting in a magazine that's thrived on literary brilliance in its past years.

Still, it's relatively cheap and Price, Wertheim, Smith, Posnanski, Wolff and a few others make it worth the price, even if you do end up having to wade through mostly unspectacular pieces.

With that said, I want to reiterate that I believe just about every writer for Sports Illustrated is very talented. I just think a guy like Mannix is at his best breaking stories on the website and compiling Inside the NBA.

 

An epic, preening, self-absorbed bore.