Surely you jest

I have read RD for 2 decades bc I’ve always been interested in sports media. I know his support of WBB and players/teams of all sorts is sincere. He’s no opportunistic, capitalist grifter. I think, for whatever reason,you assumed bad faith in a take you disagree with and went overboard.

Lol dude. All I’m saying is you’re introducing more info than most people have. We are arguing about X column based on what X says. You’re now defending your take about X based on information in Y without mentioning Y until this very back and forth.

So now you’re assigning outside reading/listening to make your point? Or blaming me for not listening to something you were considering?

Criticize the words actually written or make your own point more fully in your column rather than knee jerk on Blue Sky.

That’s not the same thing as treating her like she’s the only thing from keeping the league folding. You are exaggerating to make your point and it’s a bad look.

That is not what the piece said or insinuated. But okay.

I like your work a lot but you are majorly over-reacting to such a mild take. This isn’t a Christine Brennan or SAS situation.

That was a screed? He acknowledged how many games are on national TV and argued the league might as well sell those final three as well. Going for a long time WBB supporter for the most lukewarm take is giving leftist/liberal political infighting.

No worries. Thanks for all the good work. Loving the pod.

Great pod. Small correction - you kept saying Unrivaled secured $100M annually. It’s $100M over six years. (I think you and your guest cleaned it up by implication later in the pod but it was noticeable because you said it twice.)

You talked about Leslie as a model and a Simpsons character and TV appearances. Candace’s impact on ratings and brand deals. The words MVP or championship are not part of your contextual history.

About their on the field accomplishments and who is the greatest QB ever. Not their overall cultural resonance - the NFL, and star QBs in general, have that already, almost innately. Not even you focused LL or CP’s on the court accomplishments when discussing the throughline to Clark.

I thought we were talking about cultural resonance, not simply on the field/court?

Clark has had all of one W season under her belt. At the same point in his NFL career, Mahomes hadn’t really played in the NFL. And while he had a very good college career, he wasn’t even a Heisman finalist.

And explain what level of cultural resonance you think it had before this latest explosion. The W was slowly growing, that’s no doubt. But “cultural resonance” is a more complex idea.

If you write about this I hope you cite sources for who is saying or implying that WBB had little cultural resonance and it’s not some random X user saying “no one watched WBB before CC.”

Her (silent) reaction to the privilege quote was…interesting. Clark said the same thing that other white players have been praised for. Maybe Swoopes doesn’t think any of those statements were good enough either or were meaningful (which, fair), but was she asked to react to those? Probably not.

I always read your historical things. I will check it out. Don’t get me wrong - I’m being tough on you but I like your work. I just call things like I see them.

The 2022 one on Aaron Judge is worth a read too. (Gregory wrote it.) It notes how his 62-HR season boosted attendance, ratings, and engagement, with no qualifiers. (Note: Astros won the WS.) No profile is perfect but the criticism of the Clark one is being nitpicky. It was far from a hagiography.

A 34 minute read wasn’t enough for you?

I think if you would take a didn’t approach, it’s something you should pitch. ✌️

This isn’t a story about her rise. It’s a profile of her and why they gave her an “of the year” award so it focuses on what happened in that year (the good, bad, and ugly). The you would take a different approach doesn’t mean the profile even comes close to acting like she invented basketball.

It’s a profile, not a W history lesson, written for a general audience. Not everything is flattering to Clark. It interrogates so much that contributed to her rise, good and bad. The writer asks her about every single controversy. I’m an OG W fan and don’t understand your take.

It’s not framed that way and anyone reading it that way is doing so is majorly nitpicking. I’m a fan of Andrew/ NCS too, but I think people are intentionally misreading the profile because they actually don’t think she deserves the award no matter how it was written. I wish they’d just say that.

Are you agreeing that the Time profile has this framing? Because if so, I feel like I’m on crazy pIlls. It’s right there at the beginning of the piece that the growth isn’t just because of her. But it is a profile of Clark, not the W itself so what are you expecting the focus to be.

The pearl clutching from people who don’t know this (and thus probably didn’t pay much attention to the W before) before is quite funny. I’m not into crypto at all but these kinds of partnerships aren’t going anywhere in pro sports any time soon.

I’m no crypto defender but this was the case last year, and the crypto part is on top of the usual prize pool of cash.