SI new hires

[Mizzougrad96]

I'm an idiot. That should read biased "for" online joints, biglead. You obviously wouldn't be biased against.

Nothing personal, your domain is online-dom and I was responding to your post about choosing work at espn over SI. Both are great joints, but I wouldn't automatically rule out SI because their online site is a shell of espn.com. It's still a dream destination for a lot of writers out there.

Fair enough. And there's no question ... plenty of people wouldn't rule out SI. Maybe it's just me, but i'd always rather be a big fish in a small pond than vice versa .. who doesn't like being an underdog?

Since when would SI or ESPN be a "small pond"?

Sorry, I should have clarified. SI has maybe 2-3 writers per sport. NFL, NBA ... each of them is 'Big Fish.' When writing for SI.com - which ranks behind ESPN, Yahoo, Fox, in terms of 'circulation' (hits), i would call that a small (or smaller) pond.
At ESPN, you have 7-8 guys writing about NFL, NBA, MLB, etc ... and you get lost in the shuffle. Big pond.

If it still doesn't add up ... well, it sounded OK when i was talking to myself about it.

That's fair... ESPN does throw a lot of people out there as "experts" who don't even cover games... I'm not talking about their top guys, but there are some who work for the dotcom who may not see more than a handful of games each year. To be fair, some of the other big websites have been guilty of this in the past...

 

[manny mota]

Wasn't Chuck Scott the SE who suspended his college hoops writer a few years ago for getting duped and re-running a fictitious story from hoosiergazette.com?

 

[enigami]

I guess I'm in the minority that actually likes the SI site better than ESPN. Too much stuff going on on ESPN for me. I like it simple. Plus the writing is better at SI.

Count me in. I agree completely. It's my belief that you get better bang for your buck with the writers at SI. Every one has talent and is above par, in my opinion. You can't say that about every writer at ESPN.

I think the lack of TV works for SI as well. Television drives ESPN, not pure sports journalism. SI writes for the everyday sports fan while ESPN looks for the glitz and glamour far more often than it should.

ESPN has better brand-name recognition right now. Their business model is great - they simply attach "ESPN" to everything: ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPN Classic, etc. I agree the quality of writing - and the photo galleries - is way better on SI.com. Unfortunately, their brand is only associated with a magazine, one that the ESPN generation considers dated. And thus, it lags. Folks who appreciate good writing - Lee Jenkins, Damon Hack, and probably a greater percentage of SportsJournalists.com posters than the general public - would like SI.com better, plain and simple. I'm generalizing when I say this, but It's more a question of which pond you want to be in: the pond with more money but lesser journalistic talent, or with less money and more talent.

 

[sportsed]

ESPN has better brand-name recognition right now. Their business model is great - they simply attach "ESPN" to everything: ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPN Classic, etc. I agree the quality of writing - and the photo galleries - is way better on SI.com. Unfortunately, their brand is only associated with a magazine, one that the ESPN generation considers dated. And thus, it lags. Folks who appreciate good writing - Lee Jenkins, Damon Hack, and probably a greater percentage of SportsJournalists.com posters than the general public - would like SI.com better, plain and simple. I'm generalizing when I say this, but It's more a question of which pond you want to be in: the pond with more money but lesser journalistic talent, or with less money and more talent.

I agree with the above, but we shouldn't pass around the collection plate just yet for anyone who heads to SI. Like everywhere else, the stars are paid commensurate with their performance. It may not be quite what they could have made at ESPN, but then again you never know. A few years ago, SI dug deep to keep Gary Smith. I'm sure it'll do what it has to do to remain competitive.

 

[sports scrub]

I guess I'm in the minority that actually likes the SI site better than ESPN. Too much stuff going on on ESPN for me. I like it simple. Plus the writing is better at SI.

Count me in. I agree completely. It's my belief that you get better bang for your buck with the writers at SI. Every one has talent and is above par, in my opinion. You can't say that about every writer at ESPN.

I think the lack of TV works for SI as well. Television drives ESPN, not pure sports journalism. SI writes for the everyday sports fan while ESPN looks for the glitz and glamour far more often than it should.

ESPN has better brand-name recognition right now. Their business model is great - they simply attach "ESPN" to everything: ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPN Classic, etc. I agree the quality of writing - and the photo galleries - is way better on SI.com. Unfortunately, their brand is only associated with a magazine, one that the ESPN generation considers dated. And thus, it lags. Folks who appreciate good writing - Lee Jenkins, Damon Hack, and probably a greater percentage of SportsJournalists.com posters than the general public - would like SI.com better, plain and simple. I'm generalizing when I say this, but It's more a question of which pond you want to be in: the pond with more money but lesser journalistic talent, or with less money and more talent.

I think SI is doing a good job on it website, expanding with a lot more entertainment avenues (extra mustard, SI on campus, truth and rumors, etc ...) without watering down the meat and potatoes sports journalism it is famous for, the links to the swimsuit issue don't hurt either, once again, it is a matter of opinion, but I would rather read a column by someone who is out in the field, or at least making phone calls, than someone ranting from their livingroom couch, that's just me ...

 

[enigami]

I think SI is doing a good job on it website, expanding with a lot more entertainment avenues (extra mustard, SI on campus, truth and rumors, etc ...) without watering down the meat and potatoes sports journalism it is famous for, the links to the swimsuit issue don't hurt either, once again, it is a matter of opinion, but I would rather read a column by someone who is out in the field, or at least making phone calls, than someone ranting from their livingroom couch, that's just me ...

Amen, scrub.