The Sports Boy mails in another bucketload of bull$#$#

[Starman]

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/blog/index?name=simmons


1. The "running diary" schtick is completely played out.

3:43 a.m.: I pull my penis out, and tug it three times.
3:44 a.m.: I tug it four more times.
3:45 a.m. ....

2. 94.4 percent of the national audience doesn't give a shirt if the Boston Celtics ever get good again. They've had 20 years to do it; who gives a fork if they do or not?

 

[Totally Krossed Out]

I actually think that's where he's best. Celtics gamers aren't as funny as, say, NBA Draft, but some of his comments are pretty witty and his false sense of self-importance doesn't come through as much.

All in all, I thought it was a fun read.

 

[Fenian_Bastard]

Well, that got my heart started.

 

[DrRosenpenis]

Starman, you obviously don't like Simmons. Why do you keep reading him?

 

[shotglass]

Same reason you slow down and crane your neck as you pass a car crash.

What don't some people get about that?

 

[Ike Broflovski]

I gave him a chance a couple of times, but I don't read him. I just don't think he has anything interesting to say. Furthermore . . .

I just did a word count on this column: 3,062 words. That's at least 75 column inches in a newspaper, maybe even close to 100 in some -- with art, a full page. Think of that. Would you read a newspaper column that big, by anybody?

I don't know the guy, but it strikes me as incredibly arrogant if he thinks that people are going to hang on to his droll observations for 3,062 words. He doesn't seem to give a shirt about his readers, or else the columns would be shorter.

 

[Cousin Jeffrey]

I thought that was his A material. Good stuff, fun to read on the Internet. That's what he does best.

 

[fmrsped]

Starman, you obviously don't like Simmons. Why do you keep reading him?

Exactly.

Starman, go back to one of your other 4,000 pet peeves, Larry Brown or Isiah Thomas or whomever.

And please do it quietly.

 

[Mmac]

The "running diary" is infinitely better than what he posted today--which was just a virtual verbatim cut and paste of a column he wrote a couple years ago about Holy Cross in the tourney--you can't mail it in any more than that. His running diaries can be funny (the first NBA draft diaries he did were hilarious), but they too seem to be getting worn out.

 

[MC Sports Guy]

I happen to like Simmons quite a bit. Not every one of his columns strikes a cord with me, but I can't think of any writer who does. If you don't like him, stop clicking.

 

[dooley_womack1]

On the other hand, if you see that Starman started a thread about Simmons, and you can't take fair comment and criticism, don't click on the thread.

 

[Mighty_Wingman]

The "running diary" is infinitely better than what he posted today--which was just a virtual verbatim cut and paste of a column he wrote a couple years ago about Holy Cross in the tourney--you can't mail it in any more than that. His running diaries can be funny (the first NBA draft diaries he did were hilarious), but they too seem to be getting worn out.

In fairness -- and I'm not a big fan of Simmons' these days -- today's column wasn't "a virtual cut and paste." It was the same column, as he made entirely clear at the top.

Sadly, I have nothing new for you to read until Monday's mammoth recap from the weekend. (If you missed any of the previous Basketball Blog entries, click on the links from March and February on the calendar that's sitting on the top right of this page.) And since we didn't want to leave today's space empty, we're re-running a March Madness column from March 2002 that will (hopefully) get you in the mood for the next three weeks.