Sports Illustrated, RIP . . .

[BillOGoods]

I can't believe how far this venerable review of sports has fallen. It just hit me in the last two months that this is no longer the last word about about what has happened in the last week in sports (and its impact on society). Ha! What a joke, "the last word"? Hardly, it's not even relevant or even interesting anymore.

For almost fifty years, I have looked for SI to arrive in the mail on Thursday and be damed hacked off if it was late. Once in my hands, I quickly surveyed the magazine for interesting pictures or articles to come back to.

I don't remember when it happened, but at some point I would always go to the end and read Frank Deford or Rick Reilly and, then, when Steve Rushin started, he was a no miss. He might have been the greatest writer SI ever had. Then, on to the "meat and potataas," served up by some of the finest "beat" writers around.

Now, I find, for the last few years it has become painfully obvious how tedious, predictable, and boring every page has become. Holier than thou, politically correct, and stale. I mean, who the hell is Selena Roberts or Chris Ballard in the Point After spot and why, on earth, should anyone even care?

This "First Person" column that attempts to let us all get to know a professional athlete makes me want to puke, e.g., who gives a flying crap about Joba Chamberlain's beaded necklace? The sissy. That's all we need to know. He's a chump. And, oh boy, wasn't that interesting that Cliff Floyd last week and his bowling hobby.

Need I say more. The Stanley Cup coverage was, in a word, pathetic. They need to clean house, go back to the basics, get off the soap box, and start mattering again. It's a tall order.

[tritongreen]

It's not 1985 anymore. It's tough competing against the internet. SI is still the best at what they do.

[Venomous Green Duck]

I still like the Faces in the Crowd and swimsuit issue-- for two very different reasons.

[#1]

I got a subscription in High School as a birthday present from my dad (because I always used to read my grandpa's), I only let it go 1 year but got 4 years worth of crap in the mail every week asking me to resubscribe.

[conleyet]

Just when I start to doubt SI, I get an issue like today's, with the incredible feature on Tim Lincecum by Tom Verducci, and my faith is restored.

Oh, and if it weren't for SI, no one would ever know about this:







I don't think SI's problem is the Internet. No one should be reading Sports Illustrated for breaking news. It's that the market is so saturated that their writers just don't get the access they used to. Go to the SI Vault and read all the features on Clay/Ali from the 60s and 70s. You'll never see a writer get that close to any athlete of that magnitude again.

And if you miss Rick Reilly, you have two options:

1) Read him at ESPN.com
2) Just flip through some old SI issues, because he's been writing the same ****ing column since he got on the back page.

[Ozymandias]

Hey BOG, what do they think of Devin Thomas?

[Nigea Carter]

Originally Posted by Ozymandias

Hey BOG, what do they think of Devin Thomas?

I just saw an ad for a gillette shaver with a huge block M on the page and the shaver...I just ripped out the ad, tore it up and came to my computer and saw this thread....for the most part SI is 90% garbage and I won't be renewing my subscription.

[Ozymandias]

Originally Posted by Nigea Carter

I just saw an ad for a gillette shaver with a huge block M on the page and the shaver...I just ripped out the ad, tore it up and came to my computer and saw this thread....for the most part SI is 90% garbage and I won't be renewing my subscription.

OMG OMG OMG OMG, they had an ad that mentioned something related to UM...LET'S BURN DOWN THEIR OFFICES AND KILL THEIR FAMILIES!!!!!

[Nigea Carter]

Originally Posted by Ozymandias

OMG OMG OMG OMG, they had an ad that mentioned something related to UM...LET'S BURN DOWN THEIR OFFICES AND KILL THEIR FAMILIES!!!!!

naw. how about I just kick your monkey a**

[LA_Spartan]

Originally Posted by conleyet

Just when I start to doubt SI, I get an issue like today's, with the incredible feature on Tim Lincecum by Tom Verducci, and my faith is restored.

And every other issue contains an article like the one on Ping Pong Diplomacy or about Raymond Berry, which you won't find anywhere else.

[Jack's Smirking Revenge]

Originally Posted by BillOGoods

I can't believe how far this venerable review of sports has fallen. It just hit me in the last two months that this is no longer the last word about about what has happened in the last week in sports (and its impact on society). Ha! What a joke, "the last word"? Hardly, it's not even relevant or even interesting anymore.

For almost fifty years, I have looked for SI to arrive in the mail on Thursday and be damed hacked off if it was late. Once in my hands, I quickly surveyed the magazine for interesting pictures or articles to come back to.

I don't remember when it happened, but at some point I would always go to the end and read Frank Deford or Rick Reilly and, then, when Steve Rushin started, he was a no miss. He might have been the greatest writer SI ever had. Then, on to the "meat and potataas," served up by some of the finest "beat" writers around.

Now, I find, for the last few years it has become painfully obvious how tedious, predictable, and boring every page has become. Holier than thou, politically correct, and stale. I mean, who the hell is Selena Roberts or Chris Ballard in the Point After spot and why, on earth, should anyone even care?

This "First Person" column that attempts to let us all get to know a professional athlete makes me want to puke, e.g., who gives a flying crap about Joba Chamberlain's beaded necklace? The sissy. That's all we need to know. He's a chump. And, oh boy, wasn't that interesting that Cliff Floyd last week and his bowling hobby.

Need I say more. The Stanley Cup coverage was, in a word, pathetic. They need to clean house, go back to the basics, get off the soap box, and start mattering again. It's a tall order.



p through it to see the pictures, not dwelling on any one in particular, but noting which ones deserve further study

If you're a longtime fan of SI, and writers like Frank Deford, Dan Jenkins, and George Plimpton, here's a book you'd probably like:

[ctspartan]

Kind of agree. It was always about having the best writers in the business, guys who could take any sports story and write it such that you couldn't put the issue down. I don't think they have the top writers anymore.

[teamdiscoverychannel]

Yea, as long as the swimsuit stuff stays intact, it's all good!

[LoganLarry]

I am with you BOG......letting my subscription expire after 12 years.


No longer relevant in current sports atmosphere........Hell, I am even pizzed that THN
(The Hockey News) has moved most of its content online, cutting down the number of bathroom visits needed to complete their issue.....

Following most publishing down the tubes since so much info is avail online 24/7.
It was great to read free press and Pittsburgh papers during Stanley Cup Playoffs, and a quick morning at the desk gives me Freep /Indy Star / LSJ and anything else I need.

Not lamenting SI / THN loss....just time to move forward to the internet as prime source of information. I still roll out and get a Sunday paper for a lazy summer am, but that is about it.

GO GREEN!

[75alum]

Originally Posted by BillOGoods

I can't believe how far this venerable review of sports has fallen. It just hit me in the last two months that this is no longer the last word about about what has happened in the last week in sports (and its impact on society). Ha! What a joke, "the last word"? Hardly, it's not even relevant or even interesting anymore.

For almost fifty years, I have looked for SI to arrive in the mail on Thursday and be damed hacked off if it was late. Once in my hands, I quickly surveyed the magazine for interesting pictures or articles to come back to.

I don't remember when it happened, but at some point I would always go to the end and read Frank Deford or Rick Reilly and, then, when Steve Rushin started, he was a no miss. He might have been the greatest writer SI ever had. Then, on to the "meat and potataas," served up by some of the finest "beat" writers around.

Now, I find, for the last few years it has become painfully obvious how tedious, predictable, and boring every page has become. Holier than thou, politically correct, and stale. I mean, who the hell is Selena Roberts or Chris Ballard in the Point After spot and why, on earth, should anyone even care?

This "First Person" column that attempts to let us all get to know a professional athlete makes me want to puke, e.g., who gives a flying crap about Joba Chamberlain's beaded necklace? The sissy. That's all we need to know. He's a chump. And, oh boy, wasn't that interesting that Cliff Floyd last week and his bowling hobby.

Need I say more. The Stanley Cup coverage was, in a word, pathetic. They need to clean house, go back to the basics, get off the soap box, and start mattering again. It's a tall order.



p through it to see the pictures, not dwelling on any one in particular, but noting which ones deserve further study

BOG, gotta agree with you on this one. As mentioned above, the Lincecum article was good and what I expect when I open the pages. Too many sports that weren't relevant when I first subscribed. Change is inevitable but it doesn't mean I have to like it. I receive my issues now from my future son-in-law so can't grouch too much on a freebee.

[Venice Spartan]

Had a subscription for nearly 40 years, but when they changed the format and tried to become ESPN the mag about 10 years ago I gave it up.

Dan Jenkins in his prime was the best ever

[Team Scoopie]

I normally trumpet The Sporting News as a great alternative, and in general it still is, but I've noticed their headline stories are kinda baseless latley.

Example: A big piece on Antonio Cromartie and how he isnt going to make bad decisions and blah blah blah. But oh yeah...he has something like 6 kids under the age of 2 or 3. Yeah. great decisions. You kinda have to leave school early when you have more child support bills than anything else, dont you?

And the last issue with Charlie Weis on the cover, just started off gross, with a close up of his face, showing flakey skin and going right up his nose. It proceeded to say how Weis' life has been difficult and he's misunderstood. Difficult because he almost died from a gastric bypass surgery. A completely voluntary as well as obviously dangerous procedure. Then he sued the doctor to "prove a point." The other example was the fact his daughter has developmental disorders. Having a sister with a very similar condition, I can't help but not feel sorry for someone who has no problem affording the health care and access professional care that is so damn difficult to get any help from. The rest of the article detailed the examples of why people think he's arrogant.

I guess it just might be sour grapes on a few different levels, but I can't stand it when a story is a house built out of playing cards essentially, or a story that doesn't pass a litmus test. I guess it got a little off topic, so I'll bring it back I suppose: Sporting News, despite the occasional dropped ball, is still a solid alternative if you're sick of SI and ESPN. Had to vent, haha.

[BillOGoods]

All fair points, for the most part. But, the Tim Lincecum article? Ten years ago that kind of article was expected. When was the last time that SI came out with a serious discussion on a topic that takes intelligence to tackle, insight to understand, or just flat out balls to write about? I'm talking about articles

1. that explained, before most got it, what Cassius Clay was all about;

2. like why black athletes dominate sports;

3. steroids in college football and the NFL;

4. government meddling in sports;

5. Nike;

6. the overreaching NCAA (and, among other targets, how Shark Tarkanian got hosed over and then how he hosed over the NCAA);

7. Joe "Willie" Namath and why he was great; and

8. Why the NHL was screwing up big time when it began it's expansion and what it would mean.

SI was out front, insightful, and willing to say, in most cases, what needed to be said---without preaching, preening, or sucking up. That doesn't mean they were always right, but it surely did mean that it would all hang out and be credible in the process.

Now what do we get? The biggest farce I can remember in the last ten years was, what, two years ago with their "global warming and its effect on sports issue"---what a pretentious and supercilious joke of a managing editor allows that to happen? I was embarrassed for the giants that walked before these current crack pots, with few notable exceptions.

[IGGcitable]

Sports Illustrated (as well as the Sporting News, and before that, the departed SPORT and Inside Sports) has gone to complete #$# because of the influence of ESPN. Everything is reduced to the dumb$#$# lowest common denominator. (The same way MTV has basically reduced all coverage of music and pop culture to complete $#$#.)

Of course you can add ESPN the Mag to that list -- it was $#$# from the get-go because of the overwhelming corruptive influence of the parent network. Every f$#$#king thing in ESPNMag is written from the viewpoint of a smart-aleck New York/Boston/LA fratboy who thinks he is about 100,000% cooler than he actually is.

That is not to say ESPN the network is 100.000% total $#$# -- probably it's no more than 95% $#$#. There is a place for ESPN to exist in the world. But SI is not ESPN; it is, and was a very different animal.

Instead of trying to capitalize on what made it great (great writing, great photography, in-depth coverage nobody else could match, a perspective of intelligence) SI tried to become an imitation of ESPN and in the process threw away what it did best. I subscribed for 30+ years and let it expire a few years ago with hardly a second thought.

[Venice Spartan]

Originally Posted by tritongreen

It's not 1985 anymore. It's tough competing against the internet. SI is still the best at what they do.

Times have certainly changed but when was the last time someone said " have you read the latest article about ________ in SI?" As though it was insightful, ground breaking or even amusing?

or

Other than the swimsuit issue

"Did you see that amazing pic of ______ in SI? "

BOG is dead on RIP SI