The exact moment that Jason Whitlock stopped mattering

At least Simmons started things and then they crashed. How many projects have been announced by Whitlock only to not even get off the runway?

 

Say what you want about Simmons, and I've said plenty, but the man put in the work so he can now sit around and do podcasts and count his millions.

Whitlock seems to want to skip the put in the work part and just record podcasts/videos and write lazy, half-baked columns no one sane wants to read.

 

True.

But that was also true of the New Yorker. For decades.

Sometimes it makes sense as a business matter - to Disney or to John Skipper or to Conde Nast - to broaden an audience and burnish a brand with a loss leader.

Grantland did that.

It was also a vanity project that kept Bill Simmons - the most widely read sportswriter in America at the time - on ESPN's front page for a number of additional years. So it made bottom line sense in a couple ways.

Personally, Simmons used it to borrow the cachet of other, better writers. By doing so, he was able to win the kind of literary respect he was never going to earn with his own work.

 

That is true. I also think Grantland was an idea ahead of its time. Simmons was able to sell The Ringer for 200 million dollars mostly because of the value of the Ringer's podcast network. ESPN, with all its resources, has not developed a slate of podcasts as successful as The Ringer. I think if ESPN had stuck it out with Grantland, which may have been impossible due to Simmons personality, the company would be happy to have the site now. I think terrestrial radio is the younger sibling of daily newspapers and will die a later death.

 

All true, except for the last line. Or maybe that’s true too. Who I am to say literary minds don’t have an esteem for him.

 

I think if we're going to refer to Grantland as a 'vanity project,' we have to establish who's vanity was actively flattered by it.

If we're willing to say John Skipper, we should be willing to say Bill Simmons.

Simmons' writing was never going to be talked about* like Whitehead's or Klosterman's or Eggers'. Or even Gladwell's.

But he could hire those guys.




* and never has been

 

I agree that Simmons is not a guy who should win awards for the best column. There are many better writers. But Simmons was able tor relate to his audience. And as a result he attracted a hell of a lot of clicks. That is a skill that should not be underrated.

 

I don’t begrudge Simmons anything and yeah, he did put in the work. The 30 for 30 idea was an enormous success that continues today.

It was just “a time” in sports journalism. Maybe the last fun time. Fire Joe Morgan was fun. To read it now and see how it goes after some good people and writers, yeah, the comedy writers can be assholes. Still, fun. Early Deadspin was mean…still a little fun.

Sports journalism isn’t much fun these days. What was, perhaps, an irreverence in the early to mid 2000s has morphed into a lot of scolding, be it of the institution of sports or, I guess in Whitlock’s extremely depressing case, the “decline of civilization.”

(And yes I’m aware the world isn’t much fun. But sports journalism took its turn before covid.)

 

Agreed. Grantland of course published writers who did not primarily connect with readers; indeed, some made it a point, at least in Grantland, to write things that Dave Eggers and no one else wanted to read.

But there’s no particular reason to rehash all that.

 

Don't misunderstand, he was by far the most popular sportswriter of that era. That's an achievement.

But he was very much of that moment, that first wave of purpose-built dotcom sportswriting.

I'm not sure he - or anyone else - would find that kind of audience today.

 

I also think it has to be said here that Simmons' real genius might lie in showrunning.

As an EP and generator of ideas he has few rivals.

He didn't invent the sports documentary, for example, but he helped reintroduce it.

 

Regardless of money made or Simmons' negatives or reputation, he did stuff, some of which endures and is really important in the world of sports media - Zach Lowe, 30 or 30, etc. Whitlock had a similar path available and couldn't do anything with it. That's what I find interesting. For whatever reason - imagination, personality, work ethic, connections, people skills, talent evalution, some amount of luck - Simmons will leave a big mark on the field. Whitlock has slid into silliness and bad political hot takes while squandering a lot of investment in him. I assume he's made a bunch of money. Maybe he doesn't care.