New Bill Simmons Show On HBO

[Dogdeacon]

I guess I'm somewhat in the minority in that I still like his podcasts. The Ringer is meh, I read maybe one or two articles a week though I'd like to read more. Its simply a little too broad, too hit or miss so I won't waste the time. Grantland was better and way more interesting and reliable.

100% agree with all though that Simmons has/had no TV charisma or persona, voice wrong, looks wrong just hard to watch. Ideally he coulda done a Bryant Gumbel/Bob Costas 3.0 type of show, but the fact that he isn't good on TV AND that he Jimmy Fallon-ed his guests made it a total snooze. I still don't know what he was even trying to do.

The HBO partnership/contract always seemed weird from the known perspective that Simmons simply was NEVER good on TV (kinda reminiscent of Mike Francesa back in the day = trainwreck on CBS). So his behind the screen talents from 30-for-30 and Grantland HAVE TO BE why they hired & pay him. I'm hopeful that the TV cancellation will make the Ringer better and more consistent and down the road lead to some good sports docs on HBO.

There is a lot of schadenfreude about Simmons. My assumption is this comes from his start as an everyman and that he lived the blogger dream creating his own sports job out of a hobby/passion and made millions. He bottled lots of guys sports experience and now gets paid a lot for what most of us do for fun. For me its weird that people root for him to fail or are surprised that he's not an everyman anymore after he succeeds. Ironically Affleck actually said on the show that Affleck initially failed in Hollywood by trying to remain 'who he was', but being a rebellious hard-drinking 20-year old know-it-all isn't cute once you are 30 and starring in huge movies, its juvenile or worse. I think the points about not evolving as a columnist are legit and to his credit that's why he's gotten away from writing (yet some of same people critical of his style also complain he doesn't write anymore?). His biggest strength now seems to be finding talent (I.e. Zach Lowe, Jalen Rose, David Jacoby, Katie Baker) and getting them to work for him. And maybe shmoozing with some big names too (Gladwell, Klosterman, Al Michaels) So now he just needs to make the Ringer a lot better & create 30-for-30 2.0.
So morale of story for me is even as one that still enjoys Simmons I'm glad the show was cancelled.

 

[ZooCougar]

I don't get what the difference between the Ringer and Vice Sports or even Deadspin is. It seems like we have too many of these edgy outlets. It's a tough market to break into in my opinion.

 

[Deepster]

I don't get what the difference between the Ringer and Vice Sports or even Deadspin is. It seems like we have too many of these edgy outlets. It's a tough market to break into in my opinion.

Here's my Ringer routine.

1. Click on all of my other go-to sites, get bored, click on the Ringer.
2. Scroll through the horrible set up, looking for something.
3. Find an article that sounds okay, click on that.
4. 90% of the time? I read a paragraph or two, then X out of it. 10% of the time, I finish the article.
5. X out of site completely.

 

[Deadrody]

Simmons is just the epitome of the sports "hot-take" genre. Not particularly interested in that in the first place, so whether he was an innovator or not, I see the whole snarky universe, Simmons, Stewart, Colbert, Daily Show as a big drain on the past and future of any form of discussion. Now everyone is busy DESTROYING this or that. It's tiresome, really.

He was a very regional character at the outset, so his appeal was limited to begin with. Generally sitting on the opposite end of the spectrum from that region, I was never interested in his schtick anyhow.

I saw the original promo for the show and thought "And why is anyone going to watch this ?".

 

[Dogdeacon]

Simmons is just the epitome of the sports "hot-take" genre. Not particularly interested in that in the first place, so whether he was an innovator or not, I see the whole snarky universe, Simmons, Stewart, Colbert, Daily Show as a big drain on the past and future of any form of discussion. Now everyone is busy DESTROYING this or that. It's tiresome, really.

He was a very regional character at the outset, so his appeal was limited to begin with. Generally sitting on the opposite end of the spectrum from that region, I was never interested in his schtick anyhow.

I saw the original promo for the show and thought "And why is anyone going to watch this ?".

Globally I completely understand/agree with your point. Nitpicking I'd strenuously assert that Stephen A. Smith & his ilk are the epitome of the hot-take genre & deserve 0 attention. And Simmons HBO show sucked.

But Simmons is a parallel 'think piece' genre that is somewhat similar because its often a story about a story about a game (actual event). Give me the actual event every time & most of the time I can watch it or read the 'gamer' article only. But if you follow the NBA or NFL, Simmons offers additional insights (i.e. is QBR relevant - no, are there good new bball analytics = yes, what is the NFL really doing about concussions = nothing, trying to distract us) and I think an actual thought provoking perspective vs just bloviating LeBron or Aaron Rodgers is not the greatest ever because of 'today's breaking news'.

 

[Deadrody]

Globally I completely understand/agree with your point. Nitpicking I'd strenuously assert that Stephen A. Smith & his ilk are the epitome of the hot-take genre & deserve 0 attention. And Simmons HBO show sucked.

But Simmons is a parallel 'think piece' genre that is somewhat similar because its often a story about a story about a game (actual event). Give me the actual event every time & most of the time I can watch it or read the 'gamer' article only. But if you follow the NBA or NFL, Simmons offers additional insights (i.e. is QBR relevant - no, are there good new bball analytics = yes, what is the NFL really doing about concussions = nothing, trying to distract us) and I think an actual thought provoking perspective vs just bloviating LeBron or Aaron Rodgers is not the greatest ever because of 'today's breaking news'.

Agree with you on Stephen A Smith. The difference being, I'm not aware of anyone who was ever in what he has to say.

At this point, too much going on in real life to care much about anything other than the teams I follow. I don't have time to waste reading what any sports writer has to say, for the most part. If it's the Knicks, Cowboys, Yankees, or Huskies, fine, otherwise, no interest.

 

[Dogdeacon]

Agree with you on Stephen A Smith. The difference being, I'm not aware of anyone who was ever in what he has to say.

At this point, too much going on in real life to care much about anything other than the teams I follow. I don't have time to waste reading what any sports writer has to say, for the most part. If it's the Knicks, Cowboys, Yankees, or Huskies, fine, otherwise, no interest.

And yet you are still here listening to our trivial thoughts & opinions

Seriously though I think you are right and time spent on pure escapism & indulgent pursuits has to give way to be thoughtfully engaged with the world.

 

[Husky25]

Mostly agree - Page 2 (even prior to that) was when I most religiously read his stuff - Grantland I didn't hate as much as it just didn't interest me at all... And same for the Ringer. As for his show, I'll tune in for one if I have nothing better to do just to give it a go... But I'm largely over Simmons at this point.

I used to read Simmons and some others on Page 2 religiously (Rob Neyer, Jonah Keri, Jim Caple, Jeff Merron). He would have 3 columns a week and they were great. I even watched those cheesy Eye of the Sports Guy cartoons. Then something happened and it seemed to coincide with the Red Sox winning the World Series in 2004. Simmons was already in Los Angeles by then and falling out of touch with why I originally read him. His content didn't so much decrease, but changed platform and medium. I'm all for one expanding their horizons, but I think Simmons spread himself too thin. Too fast.

ESPN dot com changed and Simmons only did a couple "columns (one was invariably a mailbag)" and one of those columns was un-Simmons-esquely short because it had to fit on the back page of ESPN the Magazine. I started to turn on him when his column became overly NBA-centric and he landed on ESPN's TV coverage thereof. That was right about the time of his Big Book of Basketball, IIRC.

Simmons podcasts were a nice length and I could fit most inside my commute time, so I still downloaded and listened to his podcasts. and I'm happy I did, because it was on his podcast that I learned that the Adam Carolla podcast was starting. Its hard to get back into Simmons now. He been trying to increase his edginess, but I think it is far too forced. Plus the Carolla show (and sometimes the adimeback podcast) takes up most of my commutes. There is not enough time to listen to all the shows I want to.

 

[ZooCougar]

I stopped paying attention to him when Page 2 went away. At some point I get annoyed when writers think they are more important than what they are writing about, as if some long form profile piece is like a Picasso or a Monet. It just seems pretentious.

 

[CTMike]

I stopped paying attention to him when Page 2 went away. At some point I get annoyed when writers think they are more important than what they are writing about, as if some long form profile piece is like a Picasso or a Monet. It just seems pretentious.

Like binding up all your blog posts and selling it as a collectors book? Lol

 

[ZooCougar]

Like binding up all your blog posts and selling it as a collectors book? Lol

Back in the day, before Twitter it seems like what we call "articles" now we called three paragraphs. Now we call articles "longform" as if an 8 page article on some music critic in Hawai'i who likes to surf is so amazing and important.

 

[UC1985]

I really enjoyed Bill Simmons early stuff, page 2 and whatnot.. The mailbags were great, but honestly when the dude started being on TV and I realized he was a major dork I lost interest. Then when he was on the NBA roundtable stuff with literally no experience whatsoever he jumped the shark bigtime. I had read that Doug Collins wanted nothing to do with him on there and begged off of it because Simmons was a fanboy and not an analyst. Then the HBO show, what a loser.. I root against him fervently.

 

[Letsgohuskies11]

I really enjoyed Bill Simmons early stuff, page 2 and whatnot.. The mailbags were great, but honestly when the dude started being on TV and I realized he was a major dork I lost interest. Then when he was on the NBA roundtable stuff with literally no experience whatsoever he jumped the shark bigtime. I had read that Doug Collins wanted nothing to do with him on there and begged off of it because Simmons was a fanboy and not an analyst. Then the HBO show, what a loser.. I root against him fervently.

I've always kinda despised him and cousin sal for poking fun at Uconn, Simmons grew up as a little spoiled rich kid