The yoga must be working for Simmons

The very said thing is a lot of people do take him seriously. I can't tell you how many people I know have quoted Simmons drivel as sports facts as if he's Peter Gammons or how many people who have asked me if my goal is to become a writer like Simmons.

The funny thing is I cover professional sports, so as a journalist, I'm much more successful than Simmons. Unfortunately to my non-sports writing peers I'm highly unsuccessful. Little do they know that he's comedic writer who's material is mostly sports. Huge difference than sports writer.

Extremely annoying. Has overtaken the "Why don't you apply to Sports Illustrated?" question as an annoyance.

 

Marie Antoinette. ESPN treats the guy like he's Marie Antoinette. And he acts like Marie Antoinette.

 

i didn't particularly like this column. but there is some great insight into the celtics in that column. great stuff, really insightful. the dude knows the nba and the celtics the way i used to know the pacers. i wish i could follow my team (pacers) as closely as he follows the celtics.

 

As one who can follow the Pacers closely, I offer this advice: Be careful what you wish for.

 

But Jason, writing 1,000 words on the Celtics for a national site is like if your next column was 1,000 words on who will play second base for the Royals this season.

 

Grudzielalldfladflasdfjlashglgjaalfdhalsdahsglhslanek, right? Or is he a free agent now?

Seriously, Simmons does get annoying with all the Boston crap, and he does come off as 'bitter' about not being a 'real' journalist, but I actually like a lot of what he writes. It's funny, it's different. It would never appear in print in any newspaper I've ever read, but who cares? So what if he lost a NFL-game picking contest to a dog. In SI, Dr. Z's record is below .500, and he doesn't pick every game, just ones, I guess, that he feels more sure of -- statistically speaking, I could flip a coin for every game and beat that, but he's well respected.

Simmons is what he is -- a guy who's usually pretty funny, with occassional misses like every other human on Earth, who writes in a style that's not quite fit for newspaper print. But that doesn't make it bad.

 

The funny I don't see.
The funny I have never seen.
And Whitlock's trolling.

 

Simmons has done what newspapers couldn't -- sell long-form writing to young male readers. If that isn't Nobel-worthy, I don't know what is.

 

Long-form, yes.
Writing?
Occasionally.

 

His Boston-obsession works because fans feel the same way about their own teams, even if they could care less about the Celtics or Red Sox. I find him entertaining, though not as frequently now that his schtick has become so familiar and somewhat repetitive.

 

C'mon Alma.
Don't overplay it.

 

Antoinette found an angle, executed it nicely, and made a name. That's one thing. In a sense, good for him, finding a way to write about sports outside the food chain. Had he successfully passed into comedy writing, as he intended, even better, although the Kimmel/Carrolla name-dropping era was almost unbearable.

But he returned to the same, boring, frat guy schtick. I mean, when you work at ESPN making barrels of dough per month with every resource at your disposal, you'd think you could do something a little more substantial and purposeful than another draft diary. Who cares if it's popular? Maybe it's just me, but if I had the unlimited potential access Marie Antoinette has…the guy writes fast-food essays. More than 5,000 words of chickwitches, tri-taters and whatever the hell it is Long John Silver's serves.

It is disappointing and underwhelming simply because he has the potential and freedom, and blows it.