guru
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,599
|
Post by guru on Apr 24, 2006 13:25:44 GMT -5
I wouldn't read Simmons either if he was providing nearly daily reminders of my favorite baseball team's participation in the biggest choke in American professional sports history. He blows (and I'm a Sox fan)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2006 13:36:48 GMT -5
Simmons writes about the Oilers blowing it against the Bills in '93? How were the Red Sox involved? I think Jack was referencing the fact that (for some reason he thinks) I'm a "die-hard" Yankee fan. Which is a bit of a stretch, to say the least. The anti-Yankee posts would be better served on Borat, RDF and others. They're at BEST fourth on my list of teams I love. That, and twenty-six world championships (including four in my lifetime) tend to dull the pain of one ALCS. But a good zinger nonetheless, Jack-O.
|
|
DonkDonk
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 428
|
Post by DonkDonk on Apr 25, 2006 11:10:26 GMT -5
my point was that he is an incredibly funny and nobody who knows anything about writing would say he "blows". if you like sports and you've been alive in the 80s and 90s you will find him at least mildly amusing and certainly very original. therefore, there must be something else going on to dislike him so much - clearly since you like the Yankees, there it is. Not a big deal, and I can understand that you think he blows for that reason. by the way, anybody that ranks the Yankees as the "fourth best team I love" is either a girl or less than 12 years old.
there is an objectivity of good, entertaining writing and simmons definitely passes that test and least to the point a reasonable person could see what makes him entertaining.
I bet you and Guru love Steve Rushin. I always wonder about people's tastes - who really goes and stands in line for Chronicles of Riddick on opening night and I need to remind myself America is filled with people like you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2006 12:23:38 GMT -5
An OBJECTIVITY of good, entertaining writing? That's the most laughable thing I've ever heard (and for the record, Rushin is garbage as is every Vin Diesel project to date). Who sets these standards, you, O' Wise One? Get over yourself. Nobody's interested.
Sure, I find him mildly amusing and see what makes him entertaining to others, but so what? I find Springer mildly amusing and see why others love it, but its still trash. As for "very original," that's up for debate, especially when his bread-and-butter is recounting his latest fantasy trade with "Murph" or "Sully," or how he and his dad are the "only NBA fans left." It's called a BLOG. I couldn't care less whether he rags on the Yankees or not... like I said, its not like I'm an uber-die hard or anything. The simple fact is, his act is tired and old and he needs to stick to his straight reporting... which I actually enjoy, despite it usually coming in the form of the rag that is ESPN The Magazine.
The fact of the matter is, I used to really enjoy SportsGuy until EVERY SINGLE ARTICLE became a repeat of the one before it. Back when he was the "Boston Sports Guy" and had his own site he was a breath of fresh air. Now he's just another in a long line of guys who connect Kelly Kapowski to something in the sports world. Hell, there are people on this board who do a better job. Simmons was just fortunate to be in the right place at the right time, and I give him all the credit in the world for that. But that doesn't make him the greatest thing since sliced bread as you'd have us believe. There's a reason there's a drinking game for his annoying columns (http://peterdewolf.wordpress.com/2006/02/21/the-bill-simmons-drinking-game/)... they're all the same. But that's just me. He's not my cup of tea. You're certainly allowed to (and clearly do) fall in love with the guy and his writing... that's the definition of SUBJECTIVE.
As for "people's tastes"... your apparent man-crush on a semi-talented internet hack goes a long way in defining yours. And my "ranking" of the Yankees was merely to point out they don't warrant the level of support I give GU, the Bills or the Sabres. I figured any intelligent person would easily figure that out... guess I was wrong.
You can go ahead and reply to this and bait me in any way you choose... the fact of the matter is, I'm not going to waste my time arguing with you over something as subjective as whether or not Simmons is a good writer.
You don't know me, DonkDonk. Don't go acting like you do.
|
|
VelvetElvis
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
pka MrPathetic
Posts: 934
|
Post by VelvetElvis on Apr 25, 2006 12:44:31 GMT -5
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Apr 25, 2006 12:56:11 GMT -5
What Buffalo said.
Actually, I was preparing a rather lengthy diatribe about what is good or great writing, but I got bored. It doesn't matter anyway.
Look at Gregg Easterbrook. TMQ was one of the best football columns to ever hit the Web when it started. And Easterbrook is a very talented and accomplished writer, much more so than Simmons. But people got tired of him too, mainly because a lot of it became the same joke over and over again. The same is true for the Sports Guy, regardless of whether he's a "good" writer or not.
Full disclosure, I have not read Sports Guy's book and that's probably a better way to evaluate his talent as a writer than his Web columns (or the Jimmy Kimmel show, for that matter). But, on the Web, he pretty much does the same thing over and over and I haven't seen anything new from him in a very long time.
This is one of the reasons I much prefer Patrick Hruby on Page 2. One, just subjectively, I find his humor more to my taste. But secondly, while he definitely has a few running items that he revisits like Stump Page 2 or the "lost" e-mails column (all columnists have go to items like this), he also experiments with new things from time to time, like the Tired Sports Story Ban Treaty, which was pretty creative. Sometimes they work better than others, but at least he's trying to push himself. I don't think you can say the same about Simmons.
And he's not an NBA expert, dammit!
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,736
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Apr 25, 2006 12:59:58 GMT -5
Well, as long as we're talking about authors who write the same exact thing every column...Easterbrook takes pride in the fact that 90% of his column is in autotext on word.
|
|
guru
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,599
|
Post by guru on Apr 25, 2006 13:05:50 GMT -5
there is an objectivity of good, entertaining writing and simmons definitely passes that test and least to the point a reasonable person could see what makes him entertaining. Uh, no. There isn't. There is, however, an "objectivity" of what makes a person a rube. And you, my good sir, definitely pass that test, if in fact that's what an "objectivity" is. For the record, Rushin blows too. Maybe even worse than your beloved Sports Guy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2006 13:09:52 GMT -5
This is one of the reasons I much prefer Patrick Hruby on Page 2. One, just subjectively, I find his humor more to my taste. But secondly, while he definitely has a few running items that he revisits like Stump Page 2 or the "lost" e-mails column (all columnists have go to items like this), he also experiments with new things from time to time, like the Tired Sports Story Ban Treaty, which was pretty creative. Sometimes they work better than others, but at least he's trying to push himself. I don't think you can say the same about Simmons. And he's not an NBA expert, dammit! And Hruby is a Hoya. Which - by definition - makes him awesome.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Apr 25, 2006 13:41:30 GMT -5
Hey, look at that. Those TMQ archives which had mysteriously disappeared a couple years ago are somehow back as well. Those folks at Disney really are magicians.
On an unrelated note, Cam, it's getting really hard to appreciate any of your posts because I begin by retching at the sight of your avatar. Well done!
|
|
DonkDonk
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 428
|
Post by DonkDonk on Apr 26, 2006 13:19:54 GMT -5
[Geez, this is like playing cards with my brother's kids] You're probably right, there is no objectivity in good writing. It's all like a fart in the wind. A mentally retarded person with no education to speak of stands just as good a chance of getting a publishing contract as a trained writer if they were to both walk into a publishing company.
Where we're we getting thrown here in our dumb argument is that there is ALSO subjectivity in the reader's processing of the works but the writer, like any artist, tends to follow objective standards such as flow, humor, originality, ability to know his audience, and on these levels Simmons "passes the test." If you believe that his content is lame within these standards - fine, but he doesn't blow. I don't like Oliver Stone's work, but I wouldn't say he blows as a director. but, in all seriousness, you may be right in that i suppose in the end it's all a matter of interpretation/semantics - so you guys and myself may both be right. i'm getting a headache. For the record, the only man-crush I've ever had was for Doc Holloday in Tombstone.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Apr 26, 2006 13:22:27 GMT -5
Oliver Stone = Bum
;D ;D ;D ;D
|
|
guru
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,599
|
Post by guru on Apr 26, 2006 14:14:38 GMT -5
[Geez, this is like playing cards with my brother's kids] You're probably right, there is no objectivity in good writing. It's all like a fart in the wind. A mentally retarded person with no education to speak of stands just as good a chance of getting a publishing contract as a trained writer if they were to both walk into a publishing company. Where we're we getting thrown here in our dumb argument is that there is ALSO subjectivity in the reader's processing of the works but the writer, like any artist, tends to follow objective standards such as flow, humor, originality, ability to know his audience, and on these levels Simmons "passes the test." If you believe that his content is lame within these standards - fine, but he doesn't blow. I don't like Oliver Stone's work, but I wouldn't say he blows as a director. but, in all seriousness, you may be right in that i suppose in the end it's all a matter of interpretation/semantics - so you guys and myself may both be right. i'm getting a headache. For the record, the only man-crush I've ever had was for Doc Holloday in Tombstone. If you consider Sports Guy to be an "artist" then your man-crush has perhaps gone beyond creepy. It's fine that you like him so much, I just happen to think he blows.
|
|