Tuesday, May 20, 2008

Dear Bill Simmons,

More Celtics columns, please! Me and the other 90% of the country which doesn't give a cluster of deer shit about them are going to come around eventually- just be patient with us. We'll get there. Hey, are there any recent events in Celtic history you'd like to recount for us? We'd love to read about them. Again. Oh, and make sure to keep us up to date with your dad's perspective on everything.


John Foley said...

While I certainly understand that Simmons' Boston-centric ways can be pretty tiresome, it's not as if he's doing anything different than he's ever done. You know what he does, so just don't read it, right? This is a bit like saying "I want them to write stories for Desperate Housewives that don't focus on those annoying, botoxed broads"
I mean, you can want that, but it's not going to happen. Or not happen, as the case may be.

CHart said...

My man, John Foley.

larry b said...

Think about it this way, John- how many other national writers' favorite teams can you name? How many others make their loyalties not only extremely well known, but the inspiration for 40-50% of their columns? What's Jerry Crasnick's favorite team? What about Gregg Doyel? Even Peter King doesn't make his team loyalties known. I'd rather read a hundred love letters to Brett Favre than another detailed analysis of a Boston team by Simmons. Those other guys stink, but at least they stink while covering lots of different stories. Simmons's way of doing things is insulting to me as a person who likes to read about sports. When I go to a prominent national website, I like to see the writers employed by said site covering a variety of stories.

And the whole "if you don't like it, don't read it" thing is all well and good except for two things-

1) At this point, I actually don't read his Celtics columns. Thus this post and its generic complaining. I went back and actually did read his most recent piece after seeing your comment, and noted that there was no mention of Len Bias, the 2007 lottery, or his dad. So good for him. But whatever. It's been hammered down our throats at this point.

2) More importantly- this is a blog dedicated to complaining.

Finally, I don't have the time to research this now, but I will tomorrow if I can- I think you're wrong in saying this is the way he's always been. If you go back just a few years, maybe 2004ish (pre SAWKS titles), I don't think the concentration of Boston-only stuff was nearly this high. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

larry b said...

I know it's hard to admit you're sick of him, Chris, but let me know when you're ready. Either that or admit you've become a huge Boston fan.

Martin said...

Yes, in the last couple years he has become far more "Entire Column About a Boston Team" then he ever used to be. In the old days, it would be, say an NBA column, with frequent mentions of the Celtics, but it wasn't about the Celtics, per se.

I feel as if Simmons has begun to parody himself jsut to see if anybody is noticing.

Bengoodfella said...

Shockingly, I am going to agree with Larry B on this one about Simmons. I don't read his articles either anymore because they are Boston-centric. He has not always been this way.

He wrote articles about posses, did sports movie reviews, and would actually answer questions about other sports teams. Since the Boston teams have become so good and popular in the past four years or so, he has become an even more rabid fan and has more to write about those Boston teams, so that is what we get subjected to. Simmons has become a one trick pony and that is sad because he used to be a really talented writer. Talented meaning he actually kept my interest, which is hard to do. More popular Boston teams equals more Boston columns equals unhappy readers not in Boston Sports Nation.

What kills me is people who say, "But you know what you are getting with Simmons. You know you are getting a fan who likes the Boston teams, so deal with it." That is wrong. Simmons used to write NFL, NBA and MLB preview columns that were entertaining. Now he admittedly says he does not watch the NL and the NFC. He only watches the leagues his favorite teams are in and then gets posted on the largest and most powerful sports web site. There is something wrong with that.

I have to disagree with you Larry about Peter King though. You can't tell me you read his MMQB and can't tell he is a die hard Red Sox and Patriots fan. Come on, the Red Sox thing is incredibly obvious and the Patriots thing is obvious in how he talks about them. This is not just my anti-Red Sox and Patriots bias coming out, it is actually obvious. He gives Terry Francona tips on how to better do his lineup card and continually says the Patriots wanted Chris Long. I think it is pretty obvious.

Jon said...

It's almost like Simmons wants the entire country to hate him. I can't believe that I used to look forward to reading his articles, now I can't stand that magnanimous prick.

Bengoodfella said...

Now that he is being really pissy with ESPN, that could be very true. He may want his readership to dip to new lows so they will give him a huge severance and he can fade into mediocrity quietly.

His articles have become incredibly Boston-centric over the past couple years and I am starting to wonder if that is something ESPN wants him to do or he is just really that self centered to think non-Boston fans really care what he says.

Nick said...

Simmons is a fucking douchebag cheerleader who would blow Belichek or Francona in a heartbeat if he could.

Fuck ESPN.

dan-bob said...

I like your style, Nick.

Bengoodfella said...

I like how you guys write on this site. Nothing for three days, then 5 posts get put up in 24 hours.

blanco said...

Larry b,
I think Simmons is totally baiting you now. A "C's" article that gives a really "interesting" point of view on "clutchiness."


Richard Dansky said...

Simmons was funny, once.

He's been recycling that single funny column ever since.