The most influential sports journalist working today?

Fuckity fuck indeed.

Another downside to the Mailer thing is the part where you stab your wife with a swizzle stick in Plimpton's living room. But then nobody said it'd be easy.

 

When Leann Schreiber did her report on opinion-journalism at ESPN, it made me wonder why there isn't a "Rush Limbaugh" or "Lou Dobbs" of sports journalism who is a significant opinion-maker and Cosell is dead. Now it seems there are so many people popping-off in nugget-sized bites (Are you buying or selling? Fact or Fiction?) That nobody is really saying anything. And I don't know if selling a lot of books qualifies as being influential or having an impact, except on the writer's bank account. Anyone have any thoughts on Bob Costas? Jim Rome? Steve Sabol? Don Imus?
There have been sportswriters who have had stadiums named after them and who have introduced the idea of all-star games and now who?

 

Albom and Feinstein are well-read, but how exactly are they influential? Who or what do they influence? I don't think fame necessarily equals influence at all. I read an SI story once about the guy who coordinates college basketball programming for ESPN. Now he's influential, but nobody's ever heard of him.

 

Will Leitch

 

Wilbon.

 

Real influence -- clout with decision makers -- is more local. Some beat writers and columnists have the respect of the people they cover for being knowledgeable and fair, and their analysis, at times, can have an effect. I don't think anyone wields that kind of influence nationally.

Used to work with a takeout writer when there was such a thing, on a metro but not a huge one. One of the more prolific writers would snort every now and then, "Hmmmph! Six bylines a year!" Didn't quite understand that the guy may quote 10 people but talk to 100 for a 100-inch story (yes, we ran 100-inchers back then). Takes time to get inside something to that degree -- feel it, unfeel it so you're sure you've got it right, feel it again so you can write it, unfeel it again to see where it doesn't ring true (not the facts, but the characterizations and conclusions). A lot of unseen work to deliver something not just with bounce and passion but a deeper truth. One of the worst things that happened to the biz is not being able to see guys like that use two months so well.

 

The thread title says "influential." That's pretty gray.
Do I enjoy Feinstein? Yes. Does he influence, me? No.
I've read Albom's books. The "Morry" book was good work, but very tedious. The "Heaven" book was a great read. But does it influence me? No.
Plaschke tells the Dodgers what to do and they do it. Is that being influential? Yes.
Whicker tells the Angels what to do and they don't do it. Is that being influential. I guess not.

 

Red Smith was great, but I don't know "influential" he was, even in the golden age of NY newspapers.

Dick Young was far from a great writer, but I do think he influenced the business with the way he covered and the way he wrote.

To me, influential doesn't mean you've done something especially well or enjoyed great success as much as you've changed the way people look at things.

 

For those of us who grew up in the New Yorlk Metropolitan area, Smasher just nailed it.

And there are no influential sports journalists now because ESPN-like bullshit rules and that is not journalism.

 

Both are much closer to journalists than Simmons. Much.
Buck and Madden have done more reporting in the past month than Simmons in his career. Just because a person writes does not make him or her a journalist.