The NYT and The Athletic

I looked at it today for the first time since CFB ended and I saw that most all of the stories listed in the most popular section were about soccer. During Super Bowl week. Wow.

 

What, you don't enjoy reading about the new manager's first poop in the training grounds?

 

Probably not. Akin to a non-profit think tank, in a sense.

 

It's a niche product for wealthy Gen Y and Z folks. CFB, soccer, a little MLB. There's actually quite a bit of crossover there among a certain fan. I'm surprised craft booze isn't part of the new revenue sources.

 

I feel like the market is close to maxed already. There are a thousand sports books. Barstool beat everyone else into the media outlet-turns-bookkeeper lane. The same companies are probably going to dominate the industry in any future state that legalizes.

 

I kinda doubt it actually. I don't think boosters have unlimited money they desire to spend in this way. It's tulip fever right now, it'll level off.

 

This feels equally as reductive as some of the other posts indicating the outlook might not be promising, which is probably a bit harsh for the reasons you described.

They might be pursuing more aggressive revenue strategies. But that being said, losing Suttles to an NIL collective and some of the other notable names that have departed over the last 12 months hasn't exactly been a great look. Really hard to spin otherwise.

Also, I think all sports writers want The Athletic to succeed, especially those at the top of the market. The more financially-viable options that exist, the more potential destinations for us.

 

Great. None of these initiatives are guaranteed to work and it's still floundering journalistically.

It was supposed to be the place where you'd emerge from the world of listicles and get some solid meat and potatoes journalism. Instead, ehh. Katie Strang's been terrific and Rosenthal is both excellent and prolific. The beats are hit-or-miss, with some writers busting it like it's 2018 and others...not so much. Most gamers are listicle recaps and they're chasing the tail trying to get on the gambling partnerships/bandwagons even though, as Wicked notes, that bubble is surely closer to bursting than not.

Speaking of chasing their tail trying to get in on the hot thing, they are clearly cutting back on podcasts. There's only six MLB teams listed as having a podcast, but the Mets one is definitely kaput, the SF Giants haven't had a new episode since they signed Carlos Correa (oh no) & the Blue Jays haven't had a new episode since the team got knocked out of the playoffs. Michelle Beadle's "What Did I Miss?" hasn't had a new episode since Oct. 27 (the answer, apparently, is a lot). They got bought by the Times, which immediately kneecapped their writers with a stick to sports mandate. The Pro Hockey Writers Association has begun a mentorship program and wanted The Athletic's help in publishing these stories, but were told The Athletic doesn't publish anything not by their writers and is having an impossible time getting a donation for the program from the Times. And even with the Times now owning the joint, there's still dozens of beats left uncovered. So yeah. They're floundering.

 

Yeah, I know of at least NHL franchise, er, organization that doesn't have a full-time beat writer.

And the newspaper/digital online outlet of record is trying to have its writer work that team in addition to another key beat simultaneously. In fact, that writer is out of state covering the other beat as of this post. Which it won't do for the hockey team and hasn't for a number of seasons.

Bottom line, The Athletic has a golden opportunity to own a beat. It's blowing it.