Bill Simmons: Good Luck With Your Life.
- Thread starter ifmanis5
- Start date
Even the Daily News picked up on Bill's tirade. Of course they got it wrong, he said this on Monday not Tuesday.
LINK: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/bill-simmons-calls-nfl-commissioner-roger-goodell-liar-profanity-laced-rant-article-1.1950220
LINK: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/bill-simmons-calls-nfl-commissioner-roger-goodell-liar-profanity-laced-rant-article-1.1950220
Spacemans Bong said:
Agreed. I'm trying to get to every major-league park and finally got to Oakland this year, in early August before the A's fell through the trap door. The park itself was pretty crappy but the crowd was great. There were 30,000 people there and they weren't there to be seen or to talk on their cell phones. They were there to see a baseball game and were into the game from the start, even though it wasn't much of a game (the A's crushed the Twins).
It was a very pleasant surprise and a great night at the ballpark.
m0ckduck said:
I was at that game (I grew up in San Francisco and also got tickets that morning), and nearly got jumped by some hostile Raider assholes. It was pretty loud, and while the Red Sox fans showed up the A's fans did make a lot of noise when their team did something.
Anyway, it's not a numbers thing because the A's don't have a lot of fans, although their attendance is up and one benefit of the much maligned tarp is it concentrates the crowd - 30,000 looks close to a sellout now. It's who goes there. The Balfour Rage thing they did in 2012 when they beat the Rangers...they do that stuff all the time. There's constant drumming and clapping, banners everywhere, and everyone is wearing green and cold, even if there's 10,000 empty seats. I watch a decent number of A's games, and the two times I've been on trips home, the people there are completely locked in. They seem determined to piss away their playoff chances, but if they host the wild card game I guarantee it'll be an insane asylum.
This has been noticed - they've received a ton of praise and publicity from baseball writers for their playoff crowds, which have arguably been the loudest crowds of any playoff team the last 2 years. Buster Olney had Tim Kurkjian on his podcast a few weeks after Simmons talked to JackO and they agreed without qualification that the A's have the most passionate fans in the park in MLB. It's just a great example of how he doesn't pay attention to baseball outside of the Red Sox, and even then if it's not a good Red Sox team he's checking out.
Simmons was just suspended by ESPN for his comments about the NFL on his podcast. Sounds pretty ridiculous on the face of it, though I haven't gotten a chance to listen to the podcast just yet.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/espn-suspends-bill-simmons-anti-735565?utm_source=twitter
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/espn-suspends-bill-simmons-anti-735565?utm_source=twitter
Here is a nice little summary.
http://thinkprogress.org/sports/2014/09/23/3571146/bill-simmons-epic-rant-against-roger-goodell/
http://thinkprogress.org/sports/2014/09/23/3571146/bill-simmons-epic-rant-against-roger-goodell/
Interesting spot for ESPN, The most powerful league vs alienating the guy who between 30 for 30 and Grantland has a hand in a huge chunk of their original content.
Exactly... Grantland has, since it's inception, swore in its podcasts and articles, there are daily articles with people's opinions, and the calling out espn seemed the least of the transgressions that they would be mad about.DrewDawg said:
Got nothing to do with swearing.PC Drunken Friar said:
He went on his popular podcast, called one of his employers most important business partners a liar multiple times, then told his employer he's above any of their rules and dared them to do anything about it.
ESPN would've looked even more ridiculous than they are if they let that go.
Wow. If they suspended him for that they should be ashamed. Easy for me to say but I'd be exploring my exit options immediately after that.
What Simmons said was worth a 3 week suspension, and what Stephen A Smith said was worth one week?
I was initially surprised to see the length but while Simmons does provide an incredible amount of original content ESPN has the ultimate leverage/hammer in that their platform gives him access to an audience that is just mammoth. Also its not like Bill himself does a ton of actual writing anymore.
I would personally love to see him shoot of a twitter tirade but I doubt he would do it.
I would personally love to see him shoot of a twitter tirade but I doubt he would do it.
Good for him.
[SIZE=15.5555562973022px]is the most Boston Sports Guy voice I've heard from him in ten years. That's what you say in only when you are sitting on your couch and have no access, and he went ahead and said it.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=15.5555562973022px]FTR, I think the suspension was pre-planned. I have no evidence besides my shiny hat, but it doesn't make sense. Unbelievable as it seems, The WorldWide Leader has decided to bite the hand that fed them. One thing that's consistent about the Network is that coverage trends have a habit of flowing from the top, and their coverage on Rice has been full (if not their 'flood the zone'), negative, and combative. So after their OTL piece they bang their top dawg for stepping one step further over the line? My $5 isn't buying it. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=15.5555562973022px]is the most Boston Sports Guy voice I've heard from him in ten years. That's what you say in only when you are sitting on your couch and have no access, and he went ahead and said it.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=15.5555562973022px]FTR, I think the suspension was pre-planned. I have no evidence besides my shiny hat, but it doesn't make sense. Unbelievable as it seems, The WorldWide Leader has decided to bite the hand that fed them. One thing that's consistent about the Network is that coverage trends have a habit of flowing from the top, and their coverage on Rice has been full (if not their 'flood the zone'), negative, and combative. So after their OTL piece they bang their top dawg for stepping one step further over the line? My $5 isn't buying it. [/SIZE]
Simmons is the king. He basically said what everybody is thinking, and the fact that he got suspended for it sucks and shows how freedom of the press can easily be conflicted in today's world. Yes, he shouldn't have dared the network to do anything about it, but what saddens me is that Bill didn't really say anything negative about ESPN, his actual employer. He was ripping the league and Goodell, and ESPN suspended him for doing that, which is just such fucking bullshit. It completely exposes them as really having to bow down to the league and have to appease them anyway they can. I fucking love Simmons, he is the man most repsonsible for me beiging in journalism school right now (no jokes please) and I love to see him really get after something. They were in the middle of filming his NBA preview with Jalen, now we have no more picks columns, no more twitter, no more podcasts with Cousin Sal, damn, I hate this.
MT @Ourand_SBJ: ESPN says reasons Simmons suspended - He called out ESPN bosses. He offered no proof when profanely calling Goodell a liar.
LINK
LINK
Two weeks for coldcocking your fiancee; three weeks for publicly stating your displeasure with only giving two weeks for coldcocking your fiancee. The whole sports-industrial complex can't stop stepping on rakes.
This and then this. After that, this. When we get done with that, this again.The Social Chair said:
John Ourand @Ourand_SBJ 5m
As @richarddeitsch already tweeted, Bill Simmons' suspension encompasses all platforms. That means no tweets, podcasts, etc.
https://twitter.com/Ourand_SBJ/status/514925620267347968
As @richarddeitsch already tweeted, Bill Simmons' suspension encompasses all platforms. That means no tweets, podcasts, etc.
https://twitter.com/Ourand_SBJ/status/514925620267347968
soxhop411 said:
"Offering no proof" is now a fireable offense for ESPN employees not operating under the auspices of the news reporting org? How......interesting, wouldn't you say, SKIP FUCKING BAYLESS
bowiac said:
the last thing the NFL is a lawsuit that would force the commissioner to testify under oath that he did not see or know about the contents of the tape
ESPN looks so bad here. Stifling the voices of those who would dare call BS does not work in the long run.
Also, these is a disclaimer at the top of the show about how it's a 'free flowing conversation that occasionally touches on mature subjects" which should give him a pass on some light profanity.
One more thing, the podcast has now been pulled from iTunes. You can't find it anymore if you search for it at the Apple Store iTunes site. Last one available is his 9/15 pic the lines pod. Also very weak sauce.
Also, these is a disclaimer at the top of the show about how it's a 'free flowing conversation that occasionally touches on mature subjects" which should give him a pass on some light profanity.
One more thing, the podcast has now been pulled from iTunes. You can't find it anymore if you search for it at the Apple Store iTunes site. Last one available is his 9/15 pic the lines pod. Also very weak sauce.
Well, we should see how much Simmons actually means what he says. He's been railing for years about people apologizing when they shouldn't have to, and specifically dared ESPN to censure him for this. I won't be surprised if he backs down; I expect it from his current incarnation. Here's hoping there's some 2000-era BSG in there somewhere that gives ESPN and the NFL the double freedom rockets and blows the whole thing up.
I agree, but... Where would he go? Espn and the NFL has their hands in everything. Move to TBS? foxsports?dirtynine said:
I know this is true, but it's also something they don't want even as a theoretical possibility.Clears Cleaver said:
He could go start his own site, depending on his contract and non-compete.PC Drunken Friar said:
I'm not familiar with the podcast - is it presented as reportage, or opinion? Would the listener be under the impression that BS was declaring, as a matter of fact, that RG had lied, or was it understood that BS was giving his opinion? It can be a murky question, but if it was just Bill's opinion, then it's not actionable defamation.bowiac said:
Plus, since RG is a public figure, and by definition susceptible to discussion and criticism, it would have to be shown that BS spoke with "malice," or knowledge of the statement's falsity, or reckless disregard of the truth, to find his comments defamatory. Not easy to do.
But the big reason why there won't be a suit, IMO, is that truth is a defense to defamation claims - if what BS said is true as a matter of fact - if RG did lie - then it can't be defamatory. And BS's attorneys would have the right to depose RG under oath and to demand all relevant documents from RG and the NFL. No fucking way that Park Avenue is going to leave the door open for that.
Defamation law is really funky, there are lots of other wrinkles, but based on the above, I would be shocked to see BS/ESPN get sued for this.
The issue isn't that Simmons potentially opened them up to a defamation suit--and Floyd Abrams is right, the NFL isn't actually going to sue when truth is a defense--the issue is that Simmons said something potentially defamatory about ESPN's biggest partner. The core of SImmon's argument is that Goodell is lying about seeing the tape and while we may suspect that Goodell saw it do any of us really know?
While it's clearly an opinion show generally, there was no real ambiguity with what he was saying:OilCanShotTupac said:
As far as the second half, he's pretty clearly within the "reckless disregard" part of the public figure defense. Hell, "I'm being reckless" was basically the tone of the entire rant:
Now I agree he's not going to get sued, as Goodell isn't going to want to be deposed, but that doesn't mean ESPN should look the other way on this. If I expose myself and my employer to a lawsuit, even though nothing is clearly going to come over it, I can probably expect some kind of repercussions. Just as a matter of policy. "Don't worry, they'll never sue us" isn't a great HR defense.
Can you say, "discovery"?Clears Cleaver said:
It would be the greatest shitshow in the history of sports.
Simmons invited ESPN to step on their dicks and they actually did it. They showed they're a bunch of toadies for Goodell. Good for him.
Simmons's greatest strength and weakness is his willingness to go "come at me bro." He looked like an ass when he did it to Charlie Pierce and Olbermann and he looks great here. But it's simple, really; when you punch up, you're a hero. When you punch down, you're a dick. But he's basically the same guy who gets worked up and sometimes doesn't give a shit.
I dunno. He clearly says, more than once, "I think .... "
I'd have to look at it more closely, but IMO that makes it BS's opinion and not a representation of fact.
I get the rest of your point, that ESPN can't be expected to look the other way, but I don't agree. They've opened themselves up to several criticisms: that BS got 3 weeks for saying what everyone was thinking, while Steven A. got only 1 for basically saying that women are complicit in their own abuse (this is all over Facebook tonight); that ESPN has whored out for the NFL; that ESPN lets Ray Lewis opine on cover ups and seems fine with that, but punishes BS.
I think ESPN would have been better served by issuing a statement that BS's opinions are his alone, not the network's; that it wasn't a statement of fact, etc.; and that they strongly disagree with the tone and content of the statement. The whole thing would have died out. With this high profile action, they just threw gas on the fire and ensured it will not go away.
I'd have to look at it more closely, but IMO that makes it BS's opinion and not a representation of fact.
I get the rest of your point, that ESPN can't be expected to look the other way, but I don't agree. They've opened themselves up to several criticisms: that BS got 3 weeks for saying what everyone was thinking, while Steven A. got only 1 for basically saying that women are complicit in their own abuse (this is all over Facebook tonight); that ESPN has whored out for the NFL; that ESPN lets Ray Lewis opine on cover ups and seems fine with that, but punishes BS.
I think ESPN would have been better served by issuing a statement that BS's opinions are his alone, not the network's; that it wasn't a statement of fact, etc.; and that they strongly disagree with the tone and content of the statement. The whole thing would have died out. With this high profile action, they just threw gas on the fire and ensured it will not go away.
I have a hard time believing Simmons is going to be absolutely silent for 3 weeks. It also would not be like Bill to apologize at all. This smacks of a couple of ESPN corporate types saying something to the effect of " We're ESPN he cant say that shit without suffering the consequences".
ESPN called Simmon's bluff and now its on him to respond in some way. Hope he does. I mean does ESPN really want to get in a public fight with one of their top talents over defending Roger ? It just seems short sighted to me.
ESPN called Simmon's bluff and now its on him to respond in some way. Hope he does. I mean does ESPN really want to get in a public fight with one of their top talents over defending Roger ? It just seems short sighted to me.
I can't believe ESPN suspended him for that tirade. It was no different than Simmons' usual rants other than saying "liar, liar! pants on fire"
Anybody remember the website for his underground blog from his last hiatus? As I remember it, he would post old material from his Digital Cities and Page 2 days and there was a big picture of Andy Dufresne on the front page. I'm hoping it resurfaces.