Jones gives good blog?

[Point of Order]

Worst page of double entendre ever.

 

[Ace]

I'm not much of a driver or a putter. But I know a thing or two about sand wedges.

That sounds like it would chafe and irritate.

 

[Boom_70]

I'm not much of a driver or a putter. But I know a thing or two about sand wedges.

That sounds like it would chafe and irritate.

plus it's a 2 stroke penalty if you touch the surface with your wedge.

 

[Ace]

I'm not much of a driver or a putter. But I know a thing or two about sand wedges.

That sounds like it would chafe and irritate.

plus it's a 2 stroke penalty if you touch the surface with your wedge.

Work on your 5 wood. That's a versatile club.

 

[93Devil]

If you are not tempted to say "That's what she said..." about 27 times during a round of golf, then you have no sense of humor.

 

[Scott Carefoot]

I would kill for Buzz Bissinger to come here and defend his writing.

It would be epic.

I'm mostly a lurker on this board, but it strikes me that people in this industry (and on this board) seem to be given a lot more leeway for their recent failures if they've had past successes than these same people give the athletes they cover. I know Bissinger has done great work in the past, but it baffles me why anyone would regard him as anything more than an entertaining curiosity based on his recent work.

I think that many writers get to a point where they expect that any prose they craft should be treated as spun gold based on their track record, and that shirt doesn't fly with me. When a once-great athlete gets fat and lazy and stops performing at the level that got him rich -- but continues getting paid at a level based on that previous performance -- I think it's more than fair to call him out for it.

 

[Versatile]

I would kill for Buzz Bissinger to come here and defend his writing.

It would be epic.

I'm mostly a lurker on this board, but it strikes me that people in this industry (and on this board) seem to be given a lot more leeway for their recent failures if they've had past successes than these same people give the athletes they cover. I know Bissinger has done great work in the past, but it baffles me why anyone would regard him as anything more than an entertaining curiosity based on his recent work.

I think that many writers get to a point where they expect that any prose they craft should be treated as spun gold based on their track record, and that shirt doesn't fly with me. When a once-great athlete gets fat and lazy and stops performing at the level that got him rich -- but continues getting paid at a level based on that previous performance -- I think it's more than fair to call him out for it.

I think YankeeFan is actually suggesting that Bissinger is a foul-mouth assclown.

And I disagree to some degree. I will defend a guy like Bissinger because I think when you look at his actual work, he's not really as much of a clown as his Twitter account makes him seem. But Rick Reilly? I don't think anyone on this board will take a stand that his output the past five years has been anything but miserable. I'll happily rip on John Feinstein for the same reason.

 

[Boom_70]

I would kill for Buzz Bissinger to come here and defend his writing.

It would be epic.

I'm mostly a lurker on this board, but it strikes me that people in this industry (and on this board) seem to be given a lot more leeway for their recent failures if they've had past successes than these same people give the athletes they cover. I know Bissinger has done great work in the past, but it baffles me why anyone would regard him as anything more than an entertaining curiosity based on his recent work.

I think that many writers get to a point where they expect that any prose they craft should be treated as spun gold based on their track record, and that shirt doesn't fly with me. When a once-great athlete gets fat and lazy and stops performing at the level that got him rich -- but continues getting paid at a level based on that previous performance -- I think it's more than fair to call him out for it.

It's deeper than that. There is a secret list of SJ icons that under no circumstances can be criticized by the membership. There is also another list where all bets are off. It's not a list that you want to be on.

 

[Lugnuts]

What's interesting is when someone migrates from one list to the other. Jason Whitlock did that.

 

[Boom_70]

What's interesting is when someone migrates from one list to the other. Jason Whitlock did that.

I don't know. I think the "big man" was always a polarizing
force.

 

[Ace]

I would kill for Buzz Bissinger to come here and defend his writing.

It would be epic.

I'm mostly a lurker on this board, but it strikes me that people in this industry (and on this board) seem to be given a lot more leeway for their recent failures if they've had past successes than these same people give the athletes they cover. I know Bissinger has done great work in the past, but it baffles me why anyone would regard him as anything more than an entertaining curiosity based on his recent work.

I think that many writers get to a point where they expect that any prose they craft should be treated as spun gold based on their track record, and that shirt doesn't fly with me. When a once-great athlete gets fat and lazy and stops performing at the level that got him rich -- but continues getting paid at a level based on that previous performance -- I think it's more than fair to call him out for it.

It's deeper than that. There is a secret list of SJ icons that under no circumstances can be criticized by the membership. There is also another list where all bets are off. It's not a list that you want to be on.

Which list am I on? I want to update my resume.

 

[21]

If there really is a secret SJ List, you know Ace is on the committee that decides those things.