Bill Simmons: Good Luck With Your Life.
- Thread starter ifmanis5
- Start date
This:
And this:
He was never really a writer. He was always a personality. Now he's simply taking it to a another medium.
ifmanis5 said:
And this:
PC Drunken Friar said:
He was never really a writer. He was always a personality. Now he's simply taking it to a another medium.
I actually think Simmons was a very good writer- when he worked on his craft.
I haven't read anything he's written in years, but that's because his writing has gone downhill drastically and become formulaic and boring. Part of this I think was getting to the top...it's a lot harder to motivate when you're that successful (this is where Bill would mention the 'disease of me...or is it more' for the 300th time), and part of this was his expanding interest in other projects.
Simmons worked his ass off at writing for years, and it got him to a position where some of his biggest strengths (not in the least is the ability to identify talented people) could be used to create things like 30 for 30 and Grantland. His writing has understandably suffered (I even thought his PED piece was unoriginal crap); the problem is that he can't or won't admit it. Or maybe he's still expected to produce occasional pieces per his contract, I don't know.
Simmons has a lot of faults (don't we all), and I've gone from a pretty big fan to essentially ignoring him (although I do enjoy his podcast guests, many of the writers at Grantalnd, and 30 for 30), but it's simply not true to suggest he didn't work hard.
I haven't read anything he's written in years, but that's because his writing has gone downhill drastically and become formulaic and boring. Part of this I think was getting to the top...it's a lot harder to motivate when you're that successful (this is where Bill would mention the 'disease of me...or is it more' for the 300th time), and part of this was his expanding interest in other projects.
Simmons worked his ass off at writing for years, and it got him to a position where some of his biggest strengths (not in the least is the ability to identify talented people) could be used to create things like 30 for 30 and Grantland. His writing has understandably suffered (I even thought his PED piece was unoriginal crap); the problem is that he can't or won't admit it. Or maybe he's still expected to produce occasional pieces per his contract, I don't know.
Simmons has a lot of faults (don't we all), and I've gone from a pretty big fan to essentially ignoring him (although I do enjoy his podcast guests, many of the writers at Grantalnd, and 30 for 30), but it's simply not true to suggest he didn't work hard.
I've said it many times, but I don't fault Simmons' writing from about 2000 until roughly 2005. He was on new turf, and I think he genuinely tried to make the most of it, and for the most part he did. I mean, being the anchor to ESPN Page 2, along with Hunter S. Thompson, was a pretty big deal at the time.
drleather2001 said:
What....? Don't make me come upstairs and chew you out! Mom gets pissed at the noise.
That might have come out a little harsh, but I guess I never really have considered that kind of blogging/commentary as much a literary skill as, well, writing. He was a joke writer for Kimmel, and that requires a similar skill, but I wouldn't necessarily classify television joke writers in the same category of literary ability as novelists or essayists.
That sounds like a dis -- and it probably is -- hell, maybe it is envy -- but I meant to emphasize that Simmons' real talent is his knack for innovation, his feel for entertainment, and his vision for recognizing the possibilities of and adapting to new media. He essentially had a blog before there were blogs, recognized that the Internet had the power to crash down the walls of power in the entertainment world, and "became" the voice of the everyday fan, and (ironically) has ridden it all the way to celebrity.
You know what? I take it back. I went back and leafed through "Now I can Die in Peace," and it was a lot better than I remember it. I'm not saying he's Roger Angell or anything, but his recent columns must have flushed the memories away...
It's hard to even call him a "writer" at this point. He has written 3 times in May, during the playoffs of his favorite sport. I'm not saying this to criticize him; it's just not his main "job" right now, for better or worse.
The worst of Bill Simmons in a nutshell
http://www.uproxx.com/webculture/2013/05/bill-simmons-said-memphis-fans-get-down-on-their-teams-because-martin-luther-king-was-shot-there-seriously/
http://www.uproxx.com/webculture/2013/05/bill-simmons-said-memphis-fans-get-down-on-their-teams-because-martin-luther-king-was-shot-there-seriously/
Yeah, that was cringe worthy in the podcast when I heard that. I'm not sure how they didn't find a way to edit that out, it's just a monumentally stupid thing to say.
When I heard that last night I wondered how Bill could think/say something so patently ridiculous and why Jalen or Jacoby agreed with it so quickly.URI said:
At least those appearances give Zach Lowe exposure to a wider audience. That dude knows his stuff about hoops.The Social Chair said:
Number45forever said:
Stupid like a fox! The comments in the above link alone might have helped launch a new meme for bad analogies for tragedies in a city and the fan base. If Simmons thinks we are laughing with him and not at him he might even take the lead on this.
I'll join the chorus in saying it was idiotic.
In reading the linked article, I was reminded of the opening of the 30 for 30 doc on the SMU death penalty ("Pony Excess" I think?) The doc started out talking about how Dallas had never gotten over its shame for the JFK assassination and asserted that, essentially, Dallas had an inferiority complex even after the wealth of the oil boom, and out of that soil came the rampant cheating (a very rough paraphrase). I wonder if Simmons latched onto that idea as he formed his ill conceived thoughts on Memphis and the MLK assassination. Pure speculation of course.
In reading the linked article, I was reminded of the opening of the 30 for 30 doc on the SMU death penalty ("Pony Excess" I think?) The doc started out talking about how Dallas had never gotten over its shame for the JFK assassination and asserted that, essentially, Dallas had an inferiority complex even after the wealth of the oil boom, and out of that soil came the rampant cheating (a very rough paraphrase). I wonder if Simmons latched onto that idea as he formed his ill conceived thoughts on Memphis and the MLK assassination. Pure speculation of course.
It was an idiotic thing to say.
At the same time, Memphis--which is an awesome, albeit really messed up city--should probably not turn its nose up at the good push they got from the Simmons stuff.
At the same time, Memphis--which is an awesome, albeit really messed up city--should probably not turn its nose up at the good push they got from the Simmons stuff.
Why speculate, that's precisely what he, Jalen and Jacoby were saying people in the city told them -- that since the MLK assassination was the biggest event in the city's history it cast a pall over the population. It's just Simmins then had to take that idea and idiotically apply it to the Grizzly fans.LeftyTG said:
Simmons has become a brilliant impressario with a great ability to nurture talent and get very talented people to work for him. 30 for 30 and Grantland are major achievements. But he is incredibly shallow intellectually and listening to his podcasts is often quite painful. And I listen to every one of them. Why? Because he gets great guests, just as he gets great film makers and writers to work for his two babies. So they are worth it. But he sounds and reasons like an adolescent.
http://www.thesportsfanjournal.com/sports/et-cetera/sports-guy-where-art-thou/
Sorry for the brevity, I'm on a mobile device, but that article is well worth a read, and seems to fall in line with what myself and a few others have been opining on Simmons.
Sorry for the brevity, I'm on a mobile device, but that article is well worth a read, and seems to fall in line with what myself and a few others have been opining on Simmons.
Dummy Hoy said:
And what is that point? I'm forgiving on grammar but he seems to have three different theses: "Simmons doesn't write enough any more" (maybe true and certainly he sticks to tried and tested formulas now) to "Simmons sucks because his columns are too long and meandering" (which, by the way, is somewhat inconsistent with saying he doesn't write enough) to "Simmons now sucks because he writes about pop culture too much in sports articles" (which suggests he doesn't read Sportsguy at all because, come one, he's been doing that since the late 90s).
I think the deeper theme is the one that gets touched on here all the time, the morphing of Simmons from BostonSportsguy, the underground blogger that "we" read way back when, to a still edgy Page 2 Bill reaching a broader audience, to ABC William, who hangs with Magic in prime time
bankshot1 said:
Yes, but combined with a lack of self awareness that causes him to still regard himself as all of the above at all times, and to never hold himself to any kind of accountability when he drops the ball.
That is to say: he has so much "on his plate" that letting some stuff, such as his previous personae as "Voice of The Regular Fan" and/or "Pop Culture and Sports B.S. Artist", go wouldn't be shameful at all. In fact, it would be admirable and practical, given the fact that he's super-successful and forty years old at this point. Taking new stuff on isn't a problem, it's that he also clings to the old stuff that seems increasingly anachronistic and forced.
He was always like that, though. 'Brainfart' instead of 'I was wrong' goes way back. Plus he was always thin-skinned going back to leaving this place in a huff.drleather2001 said:
For me, the biggest disappointment is that (as a writer, anyway) he became what he hated- a minimal effort, repeat all the old proven formats guy. Reminds me of David Letterman, who was truly a fresh-voiced pioneer in the 80's but who simply stopped trying new things out of laziness and has been on autopilot for decades. I used to be the biggest Letterman fan ever in 1985 when he was an innovative genius, but now I can't even look at him without vomiting. It feels like Bill is on the same path and in a decade when I see his face on TV I'll have the same reaction. I miss 1980's Letterman desperately and I miss the old Bill too. There is a reason why I still pay attention to the guy, it was once a very pleasurable experience.
I can't blame him too much for juggling and managing his growing portfolio of Disney duties, and dropping a ball or two along the way. I generally think his positives way outweigh the negatives. Maybe we blame him for not being 25 any more, and maybe he stills wants to have that 25 edge again.drleather2001 said:
Simmons- no columns on the Heat/Pacers series nor a Finals preview. He really is all TV all the time now I guess.
If his call is that he'd rather leave the writing to the folks he's hired at Grantland if he doesn't have time to do it well, it's hard to fault him for that.
If you truly love the NBA and are given the chance to talk hoops on national TV with Magic and Jalen Rose a few nights a week, having to take some time off from writing is a small price to pay.
If you truly love the NBA and are given the chance to talk hoops on national TV with Magic and Jalen Rose a few nights a week, having to take some time off from writing is a small price to pay.
Bill's TV work doesn't add up to much because the nature of the format is to make a few short points and on to the next thing. Plus pre and post game shows are pretty useless to me. I'd rather have a column, especially a 2003-ish vintage effort. Even this one from 2010 is solid: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/100602&sportCat=nbanattysez said:
ifmanis5 said:
Simmons is not JoePos. JoePos is incredibly talented and LOVES writing. Simmons is a clever writer, and sometimes a very good one, but I don't think he LOVES writing -- I think he looks at writing as hard work. There is literally no reason for him to choose writing over TV work. TV work is better for his Q rating, for developing relationships in both the sports and TV industries, for the excitement of talking hoops with Magic, and for developing a national reputation as a basketball analyst. The only way he should choose writing over TV is he LOVES writing -- and that's plainly not the case.
Simmons made a three minute piece on Duncan's career that aired during the western finals. I'm sure he sees that as something significant that gets seen by a wide audience because of his NBA on espn role.
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=-jTBbrQgTEk&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D-jTBbrQgTEk
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=-jTBbrQgTEk&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D-jTBbrQgTEk
nattysez said:
Writing IS hard work. Writing a weekly column would be hard to do on Simmons schedule rigth now. Ta-Nehsi Coates had a nice piece on the difficulties of column writing.
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/02/writing-a-column-for-the-new-york-times-is-harder-than-it-looks/272968/
The Social Chair said:
Yes, that was a poor choice of words on my part. The better way to say it is that a guy like JoePos views writing as enjoyable work, whereas I think if Simmons can find other platforms to convey his ideas, he's OK not writing.
The Social Chair said:
I agree with this, but he's a sportswriter that loves the NBA. It's not hard to come up with ideas on topics. A Finals preview. Something on Duncan's career. How a win/loss would shape Lebron's legacy. Something about Ray Allen leaving Boston and possibly winning a ring with the Heat.
nattysez said:
Most serious writers don't even view writing as enjoyable--rewarding maybe, but not fun while you're doing it.
Shelterdog said:
That's simply not true. Writers love to write. They might acknowledge the difficulty of writing at a variety of times but most great writers truly enjoy writing. At least the writers I know feel this way.
I think you'd have to enjoy it. Given the output you have to produce, you'd have to be a masochist otherwise.
The Allented Mr Ripley said:
In my experience they are obsessive and perhaps a bit masochistic. As Pappa Hemmingway said “There is nothing to writing. All you do is sit down at a typewriter and bleed.” Of course everyone's different and there are certainly writers out there who dig every moment of it.
There might be something to Hemingway's quote. I pretty much have to get shitfaced to write anything longer than a paragraph.
Look at me backtracking.
Look at me backtracking.
He also said 'write drunk, edit sober.' And then he shot himself in the head with a shotgun.Shelterdog said:
Didn't Simmons say and agree with all of that (Coates and Social Chair) in his back and forth with Gladwell?The Social Chair said:
So, new media isn't all that, even for a guy who thrived in new media?nattysez said: