I have no idea what Simmons' role in 30 for 30 was but ESPN made great documentaries before 30 for 30 and continues to make great documentaries since Simmons left.
The Bill Simmons Thread
- Thread starter RedOctober3829
- Start date
I agree. The ESPN SportsCentury documentaries were all terrific and ESPN has done a number of other cool docs too. Are most of the 30/30s great? Undoubtedly, but at the end of the day, they're documentaries. Simmons didn't reinvent the wheel on this one.
Right. I haven't exactly done much research on this, but I'm not aware of Simmons doing much more beyond positing the notion (along with another guy, Connor Schell, so the myth that it's a totally Simmons brain-child is incorrect) that, for ESPN's 30th anniversary, they do 30 cool sports stories from the past 30 years. And then he was in the Red Sox 2004 one. He's listed as an executive producer (along with two other guys), but who the hell knows what that means. ESPN got the added buzz of having his name attached, he agreed to pimp the series at every opportunity, and he probably OK'd some of the ideas for episodes. It's not like he directed or wrote anything.
He picked all the topics and directors for each doc, and owned the approach of finding auteurs with reason to be engaged on the topic and giving them free rein. It's a difference in kind from the SportsCentury series IMO.
Do you have a source for this other than bill himself? With Ice Cube and the Raiders, maybe, but I'm dubious. I don't think Simmons was sitting around one day watching Harlan County USA and said ZOUNDS perfect director for a 30 for 30 about the Yankees!
"Hey, you're pretty good. Wanna get paid $$ to direct a high profile show for ESPN?"
"Yes."
"Wait...are you engaged enough?"
"Um, I'm getting paid, right?"
"Yes."
"Yes, I'm engaged enough."
Ice Cube: So Bill Simmons, how about I do a movie about the rough-and-tumble world of competitive porcelain doll collecting. You know, it's a lot more gangster than you may realize.
Simmons: Uhhhh-huh.
Ice Cube: Yeah, it's real dope. Sometimes you can get into a real squab when it comes to finding a Hummel you don't have and someone is trying to vulture it from you on eBay. You HAVE TO come correct. All the Lench Mob motherfuckers is into them, JD, Yo-Yo, Del. Sir Jinks has a unicorn that'll make you cry.
Simmons: I notice you're wearing a Raiders cap. How about you make a movie about them and then we can about your dolls?
Ice Cube: Sounds good to me.
Simmons: Uhhhh-huh.
Ice Cube: Yeah, it's real dope. Sometimes you can get into a real squab when it comes to finding a Hummel you don't have and someone is trying to vulture it from you on eBay. You HAVE TO come correct. All the Lench Mob motherfuckers is into them, JD, Yo-Yo, Del. Sir Jinks has a unicorn that'll make you cry.
Simmons: I notice you're wearing a Raiders cap. How about you make a movie about them and then we can about your dolls?
Ice Cube: Sounds good to me.
Take a look at the original 30 for 30's. They aren't slam dunk ideas or straight biographies. He had to find the subjects/people that wanted and had the desire and motivation/passion to pull this off.
The USFL?
The Colts Marching Band?
Jimmy the Greek?
1982 Little League World Series?
These are not run-of-the-mill topics. BS has become so "overrated" that he is underrated.
I can tell you that the machinery for docs was already well in place before Bill got there. A few of the key personnel from SportsCentury were there to handle the details and to keep the process on track. Bill sold the concept, had a hand in picking topics and gave notes on rough cuts. He was involved and deserves credit but he didn't invent the wheel, the wheel was already there and ready to roll.
Define "created the show"? That's an impossibly broad statement. He didn't write the episodes, he didn't direct them, he didn't fund them, and he didn't come up with the idea by himself.
It's like saying Brian Jones "created the Rolling Stones" because he came up with the name, and therefore deserves total credit for everything that band ever did, even the stuff they released after he was kicked out and died.
It's like saying Brian Jones "created the Rolling Stones" because he came up with the name, and therefore deserves total credit for everything that band ever did, even the stuff they released after he was kicked out and died.
Last edited:
Not according to the post right above yours. But let's say that he created the whole 30 for 30 idea out of whole cloth, what did he really do*? He created a documentary series (which ESPN has done before) on lesser known events from the past 30 years (which HBO and others have done) using different directors (which is cool). Yes, it's a neat feather in his cap and he deserves to be applauded for this but, you know what, this thing started seven years ago.
* Here's my standard Simmons prologue: he's a bright guy who has done some really interesting things in the last 20 or so years. He's a bit overrated as a writer and does not take criticism well but it's still cool to watch someone who used to post here (and actually prompted me to visit this circle of Hades) blow up and become a success. No, I am not jealous of Bill Simmons, though I think it's okay to say maybe he's not as great as some feel that he is.
Yes, for the most part, 30 for 30 is a great project but what other creative outlets has Simmons succeeded in since then? I would probably nudge Grantland into the win column, but it's not a slam dunk because it isn't around anymore (because of his fights with the top brass) and was a money loser for ESPN.
Weren't you arguing with someone that Middlebrooks was a success because made a million dollars and was married? Why is Simmons held to some impossible standard?
I agree with almost all of your points, except for Grantland. For what it accomplished in such a short amount of time is incredible. That it didn't make money is a shame, but that isn't on BS. I'd venture that other than SoSH, i got the most enjoyment out of reading Grantland than an other website/blog/news source out there, and it isn't really even close.
He came up with the idea. Yes, he didn't invent the concept of the documentary but he did come up with the 30 For 30 idea. He didn't do it alone once things started happening, but who does it alone in entertainment?
He did this while writing(albeit rarely) and then putting together and editing a pretty great website that covered a ton of topics, from sports to pop culture. He's got a lot of feathers in his cap and he continually gets shit on here for reasons that are pretty odd. There are some legitimately bad writers and radio people and television people out there. Simmons isn't one of them.
Not to mention writing one hell of a basketball book that sorta goes to the very underrated category.
Wait. What the fuck are you talking about? I said that by all accounts Middlebrooks has a pretty successful career because he was the starting third baseman on a world champion team and has made a couple of million dollars playing baseball all before the age of 30. If you think of all the kids playing Little League right now, the odds of playing college baseball are slim, never mind making the majors and never mind being on a world champion. I think that anyone would like to have a career comparable to the one Will Middlebrooks has. Does that mean I think Will Middlebrooks is the second coming of Wade Boggs or Brooks Robinson or George Brett? No. But if I was Will Middlebrooks and I reflected on my career, I'd have to say that it was a successful one.
FTR, I never said anything about him being married as a measure of success.
Furthermore what does one have to do with the other? And what impossible standard am I holding Bill Simmons to? I bent over backwards in the same thread saying that I like him and find what he's accomplished to be pretty great. Jesus, if it's not all ice-cream and wet smooches about Bill Simmons with some of you people, you really go off the deep end.
Who's shitting on Bill Simmons? WTF is wrong with you guys? Is he related to you?
I think he deserves a lot of credit for the creation of the 30 for 30 but obviously not much for its execution. The SportsCentury docs were great but by the time 30 for 30 started up those had stopped and ESPN didn't have much of a documentary presence. His thought behind it was wanting to get ESPN back to creating prestige docs to compete with HBO, which he felt was blowing them away by then.
The idea to cover fresh topics with different directors seemed like it was his as well or he at least had a lot of input. Obviously we'll never know exactly how much was his idea but the way he explained it and seemed genuinely excited about it originally made me think he was proud of himself for it.
I've gone through many stages of Simmons fandom in the past 15 years. I worshipped him as a high schooler/college kid, got sick of him after a few years in the middle of his ESPN run, enjoyed him much more when his podcasts started, LOVED him for creating Grantland, but then got sick of his writing as it became formulaic and felt half assed. I've settled on acceptance. He is what he is at this point. I'll follow him and check out almost all of his projects and he has a great eye for talent that I'll also follow. I don't expect to be blown away anymore by his podcasts or especially his writing but I like it well enough.
The idea to cover fresh topics with different directors seemed like it was his as well or he at least had a lot of input. Obviously we'll never know exactly how much was his idea but the way he explained it and seemed genuinely excited about it originally made me think he was proud of himself for it.
I've gone through many stages of Simmons fandom in the past 15 years. I worshipped him as a high schooler/college kid, got sick of him after a few years in the middle of his ESPN run, enjoyed him much more when his podcasts started, LOVED him for creating Grantland, but then got sick of his writing as it became formulaic and felt half assed. I've settled on acceptance. He is what he is at this point. I'll follow him and check out almost all of his projects and he has a great eye for talent that I'll also follow. I don't expect to be blown away anymore by his podcasts or especially his writing but I like it well enough.
Plenty of people. He's mocked for his voice, his face, his podcasts, and his thin skin because SJH decided to take out a douche stick in 2004 and whack him over the head with it a few times. He gets way more heat from people on this site for a very specific reason. And it's stupid.
Simmons has created a shit ton of pretty good content in several media in the 15+ years he wondered onto my computer.
I think he's pretty fucking talented, and hope he knocks it out of the park with the HBO show.
Why?
Because I'm a selfish fuck and don't particularly care who gets the credit (or paid or overpaid) for entertaining me.
I think he's pretty fucking talented, and hope he knocks it out of the park with the HBO show.
Why?
Because I'm a selfish fuck and don't particularly care who gets the credit (or paid or overpaid) for entertaining me.
Doesn't every writer on this site get some amount of shit?
Joe Posnanski is a much better writer than Simmons ever could dream of being and cranks out quality pieces day after day after day all while writing a book every two years. But a lot of people (myself included) felt that he dropped the ball with the Paterno thing and ripped him.
Bob Ryan is a writing god as far as I'm concerned and there are folks here who don't like him.
When Peter Gammons wrote more, people around here used to rip his stuff apart on the regular. Gammons has done more for journalism than Bill Simmons could ever think of.
Like him or not, Peter King is a prodigious writer who is probably the most plugged-in NFL writer right now. He writes a crap ton, is on TV a lot, writes books and is the editor of his own web site. We have an entire thread devoted to crapping on him.
Even someone who is practically universally reviled on this board: the ubiquitous Dan Shaughnessy (who you have to admit can turn a phrase and knows which buttons to push) gets a lot of shit (deservedly or not).
I would argue that the five people I listed above have done more (or just as much) in their respective fields as Simmons and they all get slammed. That's partly what this site is about: to talk about media folks. And the fact that you're arguing that Simmons should only be spoken in reverential tones is pretty rich, considering how Simmons came to be renowned back in the day. His links were daily body slams on the likes of ancient, lazy dinosaurs writing the same things day after day after day. You could argue that Bill Simmons is the father of this very media board.
Answer me this: why should Bill Simmons be any different? And what is the "very specific reason" for Simmons getting more heat from people on this site?
Bill Simmons also gets far more positive comments on this board than any other writer.
Just last week, there was a comment on the Pos thread about Pos' stance on Paterno. Several people (including myself) voiced criticism of Pos. A couple of people defended Pos, tepidly, and that was that.
Nobody defends King except in the most egregious circumstances, like when he is literally misquoted.
Yet Simmons has a veritable SoSH Honor Guard that rally to his defense if more than 2 posts in a row criticize the guy. Honestly, if people weren't so hell-bent on defending Simmons, there wouldn't be nearly as many anti-Simmons posts. There's an escalation factor that exists with him that does not with any other media figure, and I think it's disingenuous to discuss SoSH's general treatment of him without factoring that in.
I don't even hate Bill Simmons; I loved the guy...15 years ago. But he's been basically coasting on that reputation for 10 years.
Just last week, there was a comment on the Pos thread about Pos' stance on Paterno. Several people (including myself) voiced criticism of Pos. A couple of people defended Pos, tepidly, and that was that.
Nobody defends King except in the most egregious circumstances, like when he is literally misquoted.
Yet Simmons has a veritable SoSH Honor Guard that rally to his defense if more than 2 posts in a row criticize the guy. Honestly, if people weren't so hell-bent on defending Simmons, there wouldn't be nearly as many anti-Simmons posts. There's an escalation factor that exists with him that does not with any other media figure, and I think it's disingenuous to discuss SoSH's general treatment of him without factoring that in.
I don't even hate Bill Simmons; I loved the guy...15 years ago. But he's been basically coasting on that reputation for 10 years.
Last edited:
I tend to think Simmons deserves about as much credit for 30 For 30 as Brandon Tartikoff did for jotting down "MTV Cops" as a concept that went on to become Miami Vice. Having the germ of an idea that goes on to become something really successful is not nothing. He deserves plenty of credit for conceiving of something that's become a cornerstone of the highest-revenue network on TV, but at the same time he's probably been given too much credit for the actual execution.
I think Simmons is really talented and his one brilliant intuition was to grasp that he could write about being a sports fan rather than actually write about sports. That was a genuine breakthrough. It was also a fairly long time ago and I think he is very, very generously portrayed for a guy whose recent track record is a failed website and mediocre studio work.
I think Simmons is really talented and his one brilliant intuition was to grasp that he could write about being a sports fan rather than actually write about sports. That was a genuine breakthrough. It was also a fairly long time ago and I think he is very, very generously portrayed for a guy whose recent track record is a failed website and mediocre studio work.
I'm getting hammered with Simmons ads in my Twitter feed. Must be my following of the Ringer or something.
Anyway, the tagline is, "The Sport of Conversation." Which: Yuck.
I don't think it's Simmons' fault, though. I'm sure he's at the mercy of HBO marketing geniuses. They've dropped a bunch of money on this and they're determined to market the fuck out of it. We are not the target audience, I'm guessing, though I'm not sure who is.
Anyway, the tagline is, "The Sport of Conversation." Which: Yuck.
I don't think it's Simmons' fault, though. I'm sure he's at the mercy of HBO marketing geniuses. They've dropped a bunch of money on this and they're determined to market the fuck out of it. We are not the target audience, I'm guessing, though I'm not sure who is.
Well I'd certainly hope there would be less passionate defense of a man who supported a child-rape enabler.
This is a great post. You make some solid points. But it's not fair to say Gammons and Ryan caught as much crap as Simmons. They didn't, they don't. And King is a separate animal who has been resting on his laurels for a decade, or more.
And the Simmons comments about his voice, and look, and inability to perform on camera(before he's even started his show) is what I was really referring to. It's like he's Hilary Clinton, picked apart at a level that is deeper than just honest and thoughtful analysis. That is different than mocking him for his occasional writings(something I've complained about) or his inability to effective analyze baseball or his inability to have a podcast with LouisCK that is better than the venerable Marc Maron.
But you make great points and you're not wrong.
When exactly did I show a bias one way or another toward or against Simmons? I'm ambivalent. That said, as a neutral observer, it seems like you and DL have an ax to grind, is all.
Because you wrote that I hold Simmons to "some impossible standard". I'm not holding Simmons to an impossible standard. I just said that he is lousy at interviewing people on his podcasts and that while 30 for 30 is great, at the end of the day it's a (damn good) documentary series. I'm don't think that it's quite the mind-blowing television experience that a lot of people here think that it is.
Please tell me what axe I'm grinding here?
My point, and the one that JohnMD gets, is that sometimes Simmons gets a lot of protection on this board. I think that it's strange that the collective we can shit on literally 99.9999% of media people here but if someone doesn't support St. Bill Simmons it turns into the Civil War. I have way more of an axe to grind with Nick Cafardo or Lynn Johnston than I do with Simmons.
You're probably right about Ryan not catching as much crap as Simmons does but back in the day people used to rip Gammons apart on this site. Agree to disagree on King. I'm not a big fan but he still breaks NFL news a lot. Mostly because he's been spoon feeding Roger Goodell Skyline chili and he does helm his own website.
Also he lives in Manhattan. Not many people know that.
Last edited:
Yes, but which side?
It's pretty obvious why Bill gets picked apart here more than others. He shares the same demo, background, point of view as many who post here. He himself was a user here and many of us have been following him very closely for a long time. He's basically us, writ large on a public stage, so of course we care more about him (and are willing to pick apart every little thing we dislike about him) more than other people in the media. He's kind of the famous version of us or at least some version of our Boston Sports fandom (and even some overlap in terms of pop culture references and overall point of view). He may or may not speak for us directly but there is certainly a shared bond between posters here and Bill that goes deeper than say Peter King or Joe Pos. It would be silly to ignore that particular elephant in the forum. So, yeah he gets picked apart here a bit more (and it's a bit more personal at times) because people who post here have a bit more at stake with him; there's a tighter shared history at play with Bill than with others. He's not just some writer covering sports, he became famous for experiencing sports on a fan level that is very consistent with many of our own backstories.
My main disappointment with Bill is that he stopped evolving as a writer and became what he used to mock (at least as a writer, to the extent that he's a writer anymore, which he really isn't)- someone who is perfectly content to mail in a particular kind of writing year after year without any repercussions. Young Bill Simmons used to hate that, but he himself became that. To be fair, I think he sensed the problem on some level, became bored with his own written voice and has moved on to other things. A smart move if you're not willing to put in the sweat equity.
He was part of a group that came up with the concept. There was significant marketing value in making sure his contribution was highlighted.
Some of it is on BS. He did not engage with potential advertisers enough. Note that BS never did a live read on his Grantland podcasts, but the very first episode of his Ringer podcast...live read.
This I would put on ESPN. He's come out after and said he was strongly pushing them to include ads to generate revenue on his podcasts. It may look like hindsight but I also remember him bringing it up a few times while he was still with them.
Couldn't this just be attributed to a learning curve? Simmons is a lot of things, but he seemed "all in" at Grantland.
He refused to do some standard things that would have generated revenue. Like meet with interested clients. I didn't say he was all to blame, but he shares in it.
He was 100% all in from a content standpoint. Ad sales not as much. He didn't just learn that live reads were important 3 months ago.
He didn't start Grantland three months ago. He started Grantland in 2011, and - without having the time to do a lot of googling - I would bet he started doing podcasts around the same time. I'm sure he's learned a lot about promotion and digital media in the past half decade.
Correct. But he refused to do live reads for his podcasts when it was made clear to him how that was a meaningful way to best generate ad sales revenue for his property. He didn't. I'm not sure how else to explain this. He had opportunities to help bring Grantland into the black and he passed on some big ones. He's got religion for The Ringer now, so good for him.
He's been doing podcasts almost 10 years he said a few weeks ago. Do you have a source for this? I've honestly never heard that but heard the exact opposite from Simmons that he pushed them to advertise it. That's one side of the story but I've never seen anything about him refusing. Also, he was originally told that Grantland didn't need to make money and ESPN wanted it as a critical success rather than a financial one.
Source is my first hand knowledge. I hate to be cryptic, and no one needs to believe a word I say obviously. I think Bill is doing great things with The Ringer and will do well at HBO. I just know the things he refused to do, and they don't square with some things he's saying now. That's fine, that's how the world works. But let me ask, have you ever heard of sales people not wanting to monetize something and make a commission? Sales people don't generally need to be pushed to include advertising.
You are right though, Grantland did not need to be a revenue generator. I'm just saying it could have done much better than it did on that front and he owns some of that.
Not to start a side argument, but I thought that book was terribly overrated. Maybe it's my fault for having unrealistic expectations, but I thought it was filled with a bunch of typical Simmons nonsense about handshakes and "secret sauce" being key to his ratings.
Every premise of Bill's starts with his instinctive, off the cuff conclusion...he just works backwards from there to fill in the facts. It's why so many people love his voice, he's your buddy at the bar with some solid general sports knowledge. If that's what people wanted out of the book, it's great. I guess I just thought I'd get something more definitive.
The book was so overrated it became underrated. I feel it is now properly rated.
in case you didn't listen to the Scott Harrison pod (and a mini tweet storm this weekend), BS said they planned to released 6 new pods in the coming weeks, with the next one being the MLB Show
based on the teaser pod on iTunes, there is an association with Yahoo Sports
based on the teaser pod on iTunes, there is an association with Yahoo Sports
Bill says on today's podcast that The Ringer website goes live 'sometime next week.' He also all but guaranteed a Thunder win for Game 6.
It's been a little, while but it reminds me of pretty much how Oliver was pushing Last Week Tonight. The promo's started airing months before the debut show and they were similar in delivery, minus the F-bomb.
Have to admit, I'm feeling some schadenfreude glee over Simmons totally botching his prediction on OKC winning the series. He was so smug and arrogant about his pronouncement and how his expert body language told him the series was over. Not so fast my friend.
It was awesome how fast he went from "The Warriors are the greatest team of all time and an unbeatable juggernaut" to "Thunder have dominated this series, and will close this out with an ass whooping in game 6".
The irony is that Chris Webber and Reggie Miller spent a full five minutes saying how bad OKC's body language was in the fourth quarter last night.