Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
Post by potentpotables on Apr 16, 2020 19:19:46 GMT -5
The Ringer just debuted yesterday the new podcast on The Wire. Jemele Hill is one of the hosts, and they are going through episode by episode with recaps, character breakdowns, great scenes, etc. In Episode One, Jemele decides she's going to count the number of times Bodie spits. Anyway, I enjoy The Wire, so I have enjoyed the first two episodes.
Post by itrainmonkeys on Apr 16, 2020 19:22:50 GMT -5
I want to listen to that but I know it will just make me re-watch the series again. Which isn't a bad thing necessarily but I'm behind on so many newer shows lol
The Ringer just debuted yesterday the new podcast on The Wire. Jemele Hill is one of the hosts, and they are going through episode by episode with recaps, character breakdowns, great scenes, etc. In Episode One, Jemele decides she's going to count the number of times Bodie spits. Anyway, I enjoy The Wire, so I have enjoyed the first two episodes.
I might listen to this, but I'm kinda sick of the Ringer.
The Ringer just debuted yesterday the new podcast on The Wire. Jemele Hill is one of the hosts, and they are going through episode by episode with recaps, character breakdowns, great scenes, etc. In Episode One, Jemele decides she's going to count the number of times Bodie spits. Anyway, I enjoy The Wire, so I have enjoyed the first two episodes.
I might listen to this, but I'm kinda sick of the Ringer.
I don't listen to much of their stuff, so maybe that would make me more reticent, but you can't tell this is from the Ringer. It's just two people - Jemele and Van Lathan - talking about The Wire.
I might listen to this, but I'm kinda sick of the Ringer.
I don't listen to much of their stuff, so maybe that would make me more reticent, but you can't tell this is from the Ringer. It's just two people - Jemele and Van Lathan - talking about The Wire.
I don't listen to any of their stuff anymore, really. I don't listen to Simmons as much because he has Rusillo on all the time and I think Rusillo is a doucher.
Listened to the first episode of the Wire podcast, the prologue. When they talked about people being possible bandwagoners and what marks one for them, I was thinking "underrating season two" and then that's the first and really only trait that they mentioned, so I was pretty well sold at that point.
Once a week is going to be a long time for a show that I could easily rewatch in a couple weeks. Might have to sorta forget about it and revisit after they've covered all of season one.
The Ringer just debuted yesterday the new podcast on The Wire. Jemele Hill is one of the hosts, and they are going through episode by episode with recaps, character breakdowns, great scenes, etc. In Episode One, Jemele decides she's going to count the number of times Bodie spits. Anyway, I enjoy The Wire, so I have enjoyed the first two episodes.
I might listen to this, but I'm kinda sick of the Ringer.
I always see a lot of people hating on the Ringer. What’s it all about? I’ve always admired and envied Simmons and his playground. Ever since reading The Book of Basketball like 10 years ago.
I might listen to this, but I'm kinda sick of the Ringer.
I always see a lot of people hating on the Ringer. What’s it all about? I’ve always admired and envied Simmons and his playground. Ever since reading The Book of Basketball like 10 years ago.
Simmons was always an aggrieved Boston bro who suffered from a pretty good case of sportswriter brain but success truly, sincerely broke him. So much of the content he puts out is (and has always been) completely useless. Stuff like re-imagining drafts, ranking players and events based on arbitrary criteria, and trying to pair experts from different mediums to talk about stuff they aren't experts at. I don't need to know all the ways that the 1996 Magic were like Resevoir Dogs or that The Indigo Girls were the Bird and Magic of Lillith Fair (a thing he actually said!). He churned out the same, tired sports writing schtick we're all used to but he wore a hoodie and referenced The Sopranos so people thought he was a revolutionary. He was gifted both a vanity website AND and HBO show but has spent many years complaining that he was treated unfairly.
I don't think he's a complete ghoul. He may be a pompous blowhard but a lot of his criticisms of ESPN are valid (even if they were concurrently self-serving). I also think he's lifted up a ton of great writers at both The Ringer and Grantland so by giving those people a platform he has certainly made a positive contribution. Maybe he's a great editor and we don't see his best work, I don't know.
But ... he also organized a walk-out of editorial leadership at Grantland and refused to acknowledge The Ringer union for over a week when news broke they were getting acquired by Spotify. Even if he's the best editor in the game, I don't know that I want to work at a Simmons project if that's how he runs his projects.
I always see a lot of people hating on the Ringer. What’s it all about? I’ve always admired and envied Simmons and his playground. Ever since reading The Book of Basketball like 10 years ago.
Simmons was always an aggrieved Boston bro who suffered from a pretty good case of sportswriter brain but success truly, sincerely broke him. So much of the content he puts out is (and has always been) completely useless. Stuff like re-imagining drafts, ranking players and events based on arbitrary criteria, and trying to pair experts from different mediums to talk about stuff they aren't experts at. I don't need to know all the ways that the 1996 Magic were like Resevoir Dogs or that The Indigo Girls were the Bird and Magic of Lillith Fair (a thing he actually said!). He churned out the same, tired sports writing schtick we're all used to but he wore a hoodie and referenced The Sopranos so people thought he was a revolutionary. He was gifted both a vanity website AND and HBO show but has spent many years complaining that he was treated unfairly.
I don't think he's a complete ghoul. He may be a pompous blowhard but a lot of his criticisms of ESPN are valid (even if they were concurrently self-serving). I also think he's lifted up a ton of great writers at both The Ringer and Grantland so by giving those people a platform he has certainly made a positive contribution. Maybe he's a great editor and we don't see his best work, I don't know.
But ... he also organized a walk-out of editorial leadership at Grantland and refused to acknowledge The Ringer union for over a week when news broke they were getting acquired by Spotify. Even if he's the best editor in the game, I don't know that I want to work at a Simmons project if that's how he runs his projects.
Appreciate you helping me understand where this comes from. Lol and the bold is directly down my alley and it's part of why I like him. The other part is that he is a legitimate "idea" guy in my opinion and comes up with some pretty fascinating ways that leagues could make tweaks to become more interesting, for example (midseason NBA tournament).
Just curious - Who would you point to as someone with more entertaining sports commentary?
I always see a lot of people hating on the Ringer. What’s it all about? I’ve always admired and envied Simmons and his playground. Ever since reading The Book of Basketball like 10 years ago.
Simmons was always an aggrieved Boston bro who suffered from a pretty good case of sportswriter brain but success truly, sincerely broke him. So much of the content he puts out is (and has always been) completely useless. Stuff like re-imagining drafts, ranking players and events based on arbitrary criteria, and trying to pair experts from different mediums to talk about stuff they aren't experts at. I don't need to know all the ways that the 1996 Magic were like Resevoir Dogs or that The Indigo Girls were the Bird and Magic of Lillith Fair (a thing he actually said!). He churned out the same, tired sports writing schtick we're all used to but he wore a hoodie and referenced The Sopranos so people thought he was a revolutionary. He was gifted both a vanity website AND and HBO show but has spent many years complaining that he was treated unfairly.
I don't think he's a complete ghoul. He may be a pompous blowhard but a lot of his criticisms of ESPN are valid (even if they were concurrently self-serving). I also think he's lifted up a ton of great writers at both The Ringer and Grantland so by giving those people a platform he has certainly made a positive contribution. Maybe he's a great editor and we don't see his best work, I don't know.
But ... he also organized a walk-out of editorial leadership at Grantland and refused to acknowledge The Ringer union for over a week when news broke they were getting acquired by Spotify. Even if he's the best editor in the game, I don't know that I want to work at a Simmons project if that's how he runs his projects.
it's funny, i know almost nothing about Bill Simmons. I vaguely knew of him as some kind of sports guy with a big podcast. I've since listened to many Rewatchables, which is pretty much my only exposure to Bill Simmons. He does a fine job on that pod, but certain moments have me rolling my eyes at him, like the bemoaning that you can't do comedy like The Hangover any more type of comments.
Anyway in my mind the "flagship" podcast of The Ringer is The Watch because that is the first podcast I listened to from The Ringer, even though I know objectively that is incorrect. I listen to most episodes of The Watch, unless they are taking a dive into a show I haven't watched and plan on watching. I think Chris and Andy are great and I respect their opinions on TV (doesn't hurt that I agree with them about 80% of the time). If they are hype about a show I'll generally give it a shot, and more often than not they've steered me in the right direction. But I particularly like their conversations about TV and the TV industry, how it's changed over time, the "streaming wars", that kind of stuff.
all that to say there might be others like me who are more Baranskis than Simmons fans.
Simmons was always an aggrieved Boston bro who suffered from a pretty good case of sportswriter brain but success truly, sincerely broke him. So much of the content he puts out is (and has always been) completely useless. Stuff like re-imagining drafts, ranking players and events based on arbitrary criteria, and trying to pair experts from different mediums to talk about stuff they aren't experts at. I don't need to know all the ways that the 1996 Magic were like Resevoir Dogs or that The Indigo Girls were the Bird and Magic of Lillith Fair (a thing he actually said!). He churned out the same, tired sports writing schtick we're all used to but he wore a hoodie and referenced The Sopranos so people thought he was a revolutionary. He was gifted both a vanity website AND and HBO show but has spent many years complaining that he was treated unfairly.
I don't think he's a complete ghoul. He may be a pompous blowhard but a lot of his criticisms of ESPN are valid (even if they were concurrently self-serving). I also think he's lifted up a ton of great writers at both The Ringer and Grantland so by giving those people a platform he has certainly made a positive contribution. Maybe he's a great editor and we don't see his best work, I don't know.
But ... he also organized a walk-out of editorial leadership at Grantland and refused to acknowledge The Ringer union for over a week when news broke they were getting acquired by Spotify. Even if he's the best editor in the game, I don't know that I want to work at a Simmons project if that's how he runs his projects.
Appreciate you helping me understand where this comes from. Lol and the bold is directly down my alley and it's part of why I like him. The other part is that he is a legitimate "idea" guy in my opinion and comes up with some pretty fascinating ways that leagues could make tweaks to become more interesting, for example (midseason NBA tournament).
Just curious - Who would you point to as someone with more entertaining sports commentary?
If you enjoy that kind of content, then yea Simmons is the writer for you. I just generally dislike his public persona and think he gets a lot of credit for doing stuff that's been done before (on top of all the other aforementioned grievances).
I like the writing of Drew Magary and Spencer Hall a lot if you're looking for the same general ballpark as Simmons. Diana Moskovitz is, in my mind, the best investigative sports reporter in the game. Generally, the Deadspin and EDSBS writers are my favorites but there's a lot of folks I like at SBNation. Lindsay Gibbs is a great freelancer. And I like Zach Lowe's podcast but I don't read his writing too much.
Though I should say my current favorite sports media is the Dunktown podcast and Deadspin is my all-time favorite sports site (though it really wasn't a sports site).
Simmons was always an aggrieved Boston bro who suffered from a pretty good case of sportswriter brain but success truly, sincerely broke him. So much of the content he puts out is (and has always been) completely useless. Stuff like re-imagining drafts, ranking players and events based on arbitrary criteria, and trying to pair experts from different mediums to talk about stuff they aren't experts at. I don't need to know all the ways that the 1996 Magic were like Resevoir Dogs or that The Indigo Girls were the Bird and Magic of Lillith Fair (a thing he actually said!). He churned out the same, tired sports writing schtick we're all used to but he wore a hoodie and referenced The Sopranos so people thought he was a revolutionary. He was gifted both a vanity website AND and HBO show but has spent many years complaining that he was treated unfairly.
I don't think he's a complete ghoul. He may be a pompous blowhard but a lot of his criticisms of ESPN are valid (even if they were concurrently self-serving). I also think he's lifted up a ton of great writers at both The Ringer and Grantland so by giving those people a platform he has certainly made a positive contribution. Maybe he's a great editor and we don't see his best work, I don't know.
But ... he also organized a walk-out of editorial leadership at Grantland and refused to acknowledge The Ringer union for over a week when news broke they were getting acquired by Spotify. Even if he's the best editor in the game, I don't know that I want to work at a Simmons project if that's how he runs his projects.
it's funny, i know almost nothing about Bill Simmons. I vaguely knew of him as some kind of sports guy with a big podcast. I've since listened to many Rewatchables, which is pretty much my only exposure to Bill Simmons. He does a fine job on that pod, but certain moments have me rolling my eyes at him, like the bemoaning that you can't do comedy like The Hangover any more type of comments.
Anyway in my mind the "flagship" podcast of The Ringer is The Watch because that is the first podcast I listened to from The Ringer, even though I know objectively that is incorrect. I listen to most episodes of The Watch, unless they are taking a dive into a show I haven't watched and plan on watching. I think Chris and Andy are great and I respect their opinions on TV (doesn't hurt that I agree with them about 80% of the time). If they are hype about a show I'll generally give it a shot, and more often than not they've steered me in the right direction. But I particularly like their conversations about TV and the TV industry, how it's changed over time, the "streaming wars", that kind of stuff.
all that to say there might be others like me who are more Baranskis than Simmons fans.
The Watch is a perfect example of what Bill does really well. He found two writers at, I think, Spin and gave them the platform to do whatever they wanted at Grantland. They have great chemistry together so he gave them a podcast where they can talk about whatever they want under the general auspice of "TV and sometimes movies but really anything" and it totally works. I definitely consume it as voraciously as you do and I think it's one of better media podcasts out there. They occasionally stray into the Simmons-y re-draftable content, Chris especially, but I think 90% of their conversations are great.
For what it's worth, Chris was one of the four editors who left Grantland with Bill to start The Ringer which was a shock to the rest of the Grantland staff at the time. I definitely have a lot more sympathy for his move than Bill's though.
Appreciate you helping me understand where this comes from. Lol and the bold is directly down my alley and it's part of why I like him. The other part is that he is a legitimate "idea" guy in my opinion and comes up with some pretty fascinating ways that leagues could make tweaks to become more interesting, for example (midseason NBA tournament).
Just curious - Who would you point to as someone with more entertaining sports commentary?
If you enjoy that kind of content, then yea Simmons is the writer for you. I just generally dislike his public persona and think he gets a lot of credit for doing stuff that's been done before (on top of all the other aforementioned grievances).
I like the writing of Drew Magary and Spencer Hall a lot if you're looking for the same general ballpark as Simmons. Diana Moskovitz is, in my mind, the best investigative sports reporter in the game. Generally, the Deadspin and EDSBS writers are my favorites but there's a lot of folks I like at SBNation. Lindsay Gibbs is a great freelancer. And I like Zach Lowe's podcast but I don't read his writing too much.
Though I should say my current favorite sports media is the Dunktown podcast and Deadspin is my all-time favorite sports site (though it really wasn't a sports site).
I've always liked Zach (through Bill), but I'll have to pay attention to the others more.
If you enjoy that kind of content, then yea Simmons is the writer for you. I just generally dislike his public persona and think he gets a lot of credit for doing stuff that's been done before (on top of all the other aforementioned grievances).
I like the writing of Drew Magary and Spencer Hall a lot if you're looking for the same general ballpark as Simmons. Diana Moskovitz is, in my mind, the best investigative sports reporter in the game. Generally, the Deadspin and EDSBS writers are my favorites but there's a lot of folks I like at SBNation. Lindsay Gibbs is a great freelancer. And I like Zach Lowe's podcast but I don't read his writing too much.
Though I should say my current favorite sports media is the Dunktown podcast and Deadspin is my all-time favorite sports site (though it really wasn't a sports site).
I've always liked Zach (through Bill), but I'll have to pay attention to the others more.
I bet you'd like Drew Magary a lot. His Funbag column formerly on Deadspin, now on Vice is great evergreen reading. It usually ties in to sports at least a little but, you know, not a lot of sports news these days. Here's his latest.
If you watch Scott Van Pelt's Sportscenter show, Spencer Hall is the big bearded weirdo who comes on fairly regularly. His site Every Day Should Be Saturday shuttered late last year but the spin off, Banner Society, has a lot of the same great writers. And Spencer is probably one of the best sports people on all of Twitter so follow him here.
I don't know how much you know about Deadspin but it was originally a Gawker media site. Thus, it was a casualty of the Hulk Hogan/Peter Thiel lawsuit and was ultimately destroyed by G/O Media. All that is to say, don't read the current version of Deadspin because it's horrible garbage. But DO follow the UnDeadspin Twitter account to see all the phenomenal writing by the writers that made the site great. Diana Moskovitz and Lindsay Gibb's can be found [here and here respectively.
Simmons was always an aggrieved Boston bro who suffered from a pretty good case of sportswriter brain but success truly, sincerely broke him. So much of the content he puts out is (and has always been) completely useless. Stuff like re-imagining drafts, ranking players and events based on arbitrary criteria, and trying to pair experts from different mediums to talk about stuff they aren't experts at. I don't need to know all the ways that the 1996 Magic were like Resevoir Dogs or that The Indigo Girls were the Bird and Magic of Lillith Fair (a thing he actually said!). He churned out the same, tired sports writing schtick we're all used to but he wore a hoodie and referenced The Sopranos so people thought he was a revolutionary. He was gifted both a vanity website AND and HBO show but has spent many years complaining that he was treated unfairly.
I don't think he's a complete ghoul. He may be a pompous blowhard but a lot of his criticisms of ESPN are valid (even if they were concurrently self-serving). I also think he's lifted up a ton of great writers at both The Ringer and Grantland so by giving those people a platform he has certainly made a positive contribution. Maybe he's a great editor and we don't see his best work, I don't know.
But ... he also organized a walk-out of editorial leadership at Grantland and refused to acknowledge The Ringer union for over a week when news broke they were getting acquired by Spotify. Even if he's the best editor in the game, I don't know that I want to work at a Simmons project if that's how he runs his projects.
it's funny, i know almost nothing about Bill Simmons. I vaguely knew of him as some kind of sports guy with a big podcast. I've since listened to many Rewatchables, which is pretty much my only exposure to Bill Simmons. He does a fine job on that pod, but certain moments have me rolling my eyes at him, like the bemoaning that you can't do comedy like The Hangover any more type of comments.
Anyway in my mind the "flagship" podcast of The Ringer is The Watch because that is the first podcast I listened to from The Ringer, even though I know objectively that is incorrect. I listen to most episodes of The Watch, unless they are taking a dive into a show I haven't watched and plan on watching. I think Chris and Andy are great and I respect their opinions on TV (doesn't hurt that I agree with them about 80% of the time). If they are hype about a show I'll generally give it a shot, and more often than not they've steered me in the right direction. But I particularly like their conversations about TV and the TV industry, how it's changed over time, the "streaming wars", that kind of stuff.
all that to say there might be others like me who are more Baranskis than Simmons fans.
The best thing ever said about Simmons was by Bill Hader. Hader was on his podcast and they were talking about classic movies and Hader asked Simmons if he ever saw a movie that wasn't on TNT. To me it was hilarious and just perfectly summed up Simmons, he thinks he knows so much about everything and has all these interesting ideas but really he's just a guy with takes like your dad.
Simmons had 1 actually great idea which was starting 30 for 30 on espn, lots of those docs are excellent. But other than that it all feels like schtick. And he has an eye for talent. Everything you said about The Watch is so dead on. I've been listening to Chris and Andy for so long, that podcast is excellent.