As a self labeled Simmonsologist, I can fairly say that I have followed Bill Simmons "feud" with ESPN very closely. Maybe he finally took my advice when I wrote him 2 years ago and told him he should start out on his own and make more money without ESPN. Of course, I wrote that to mock his "this NBA team needs to make a trade and is stupid if they don't," by telling him he is stupid for not doing something I just made up. Regardless, he may finally be taking my advice. He has a blog now:
http://sportsguy.blogspot.com/
He is also talking to Deadspin.com about his relationship with ESPN, despite criticizing Jason Whitlock for doing the same thing, thereby breaking the Bristol Code of Silence. After reading how he wrote that "promises had been broken" and his constant "I feel bad for myself and I need sympathy" comments in the email to Deadspin, I decided I did not feel bad for him. Here's why:
1. ESPN made him and he wanted to be made. This is a perpetual celebrity dance that constantly amuses me. He went from the Boston Sports Guy to The Sports Guy, announces he is going to write for a national late night talk show but still stays with ESPN, goes on VH1's "Remember the 80's" show, writes a book, and then does some specials for E-60, ESPN's new show. So he uses his high profile as an ESPN columnist to get gigs and write books, but now when he wants ESPN to honor what they verbally agreed to when he resigned his contract, whatever that may be, he is pouting like an 8 year old needing sympathy so that way he is not another ESPN cast off that no one hears from again. He knew the deal coming in, ESPN owns you, they will let you use their name to give them and you publicity, but you have to abide by their rules. If you don't, they have plenty of other writers who would like the gig and many others who could fill the gig. He compares himself to Tom Cruise in the Firm on his blog and it is very much that way, but he is not privy to murder and embezzlement, he is asked to do other things that he is not comfortable with. What they are exactly, he does not say, but regardless if you want the fame, you have to play the game.
2. He has no leverage and he knows it. Without ESPN next to his cheesy ass picture he is just another blogger. Writing about the Celtics and the Boston area in general is very lucrative for him and has given him a standing on ESPN because he uses pop culture references as well that the kids just love. Despite his attempts to branch out into other mediums, he has done very little to make himself known as any more than just a national sportswriter who is a big Boston fan. He still likes and references Vegas, the Karate Kid and the Boston area. His columns have not changed, the references have not changed at all and most of all his writing style has not evolved in any aspect.
This particular one was written right as I was starting to find a groove and my column was starting to resemble what it's like now...
He admitted it in his Sports Guy blog in the last post. The article was written 10 years ago and talks about posses. Granted, it is a decent article, but instead of posses he has now become even more immersed in the Boston sports scene and generally only writes about Boston sports. ESPN has a very popular regional writer and they are aware of it.
3. He is using his blog to mock ESPN. Between the picture of Tom Cruise that screams, "feel bad for me" and this comment,
...only if nobody was killing five of the best jokes or making me re-write them so they weren't as funny.
you can see that Simmons is back on the bullshit excuse train. See, only morons and fucking tools are going to feel bad for him because the multi billion dollar corporation he works for and has made tons of money off, is forcing him to censor a little bit of his columns. Also, what are "the five best jokes" that are getting killed and why are they being killed? If he was a writer that was any good, couldn't he make a joke that would make it in a column? He did write for a late night show, correct? I am assuming they also had censors, so I don't see the problem.
Also, he has to re-write his columns so they are not as funny? I don't get it at all. I am supposed to believe ESPN is making him re-write columns so they are less funny to him? They want people to read his columns and they have no incentive to make him less funny, so I would assume any drop off in content and comedy is the writer's fault.
Here's what is REALLY happening. Bill is pouting because ESPN went back on some promise they verbally made to him, it was verbal, he has no recourse for it, so now he is pouting and playing the "I am a rebel" card, but he sucks at it and is mostly coming off as a protesting little bitch to anyone with a brain. ESPN made him to what he is today, and made him bigger than he ever had a right to be for what he writes. about. Instead of realizing this, he thinks he is some big star who is being held hostage by an evil corporation. They have protected him through not allowing user comments and allowed him to be the regional sports fan that he truly is by allowing him to constantly write about Boston sports and some of the other non-sensical columns that he comes up with. I don't know what promises have been broken and I also don't care. When you work at ANY job, promises and people's word gets broken, you just have to deal with it. So other than the promises, what the hell is his problem with ESPN? I don't know if I have mentioned this yet, but they fucking made him into what he is, so he should not bite the hand that feeds him.
I don't believe anyone is censoring him at all. If you don't believe me, read the column for March 2, 1999 on his blog and then read one of his latest columns with ESPN. Tell me what is different. The answer is nothing and that also tells me any problems with funny jokes and article content is not ESPN's fault. If he needs to know the problem with the jokes and content of his columns, then he needs to purchase a mirror.
0 comments:
Post a Comment