04/19/24
January 27, 2002
Sports Illustrated feeling heat from ESPN?: It seems SI is finally feeling the effects of being a little too "old school". ESPN has done a pretty good job of translating their "in your face" style to print. To me, the most distinct area is that ESPN seems to be about "what's going to happen next week" while SI is "what happened last week".
It seems that SI has always had a pretty impressive group of writers working for them. I know a few non-sports fans who read SI for the quality of its journalism. And, c'mon, Rick Reilly is a funny guy. That said, I've not read ESPN the mag since it first came out. Is their writing beefing up? Like justgary mentioned, the last time I took a glance at the magazine it felt very brief and flashy. But, vibe-wise, it's okay.
posted by jacknose at 08:27 AM on January 27, 2002
I haven't read any national sports publication regularly since the daily National tabloid folded in the late '80s. Whenever they followup a big event like the Super Bowl or Stanley Cup, it's already old news by the time the issue comes out. I don't think they can compete with the Web.
posted by rcade at 08:59 AM on January 28, 2002
owillis, I think that's a very perceptive view of the difference between the two mags (ESPN's what's next vs. SI's what's happened). I hope that doesn't prove to be the case in the publishing world. SI is the standard, and I for one don't expect to ever change my reading habits.
posted by msacheson at 12:25 PM on January 28, 2002
I'm probably in the minority, but I prefer the 'what's happened' slant. Perhaps because I love history. Everything is so immediate in today's world. It's nice to forget an event, then a week later see the SI recap with angles I haven't read anywhere else, including the net. I really don't need anymore 'what's next'. Years ago, before espn and thousands of sports channels and the internet, previews were harder to come by. But today the game has been broken down so much before being played it almost feels like it's already been decided. Also, as Jacknose said, I prefer the writing at SI. Espn the mag always reads like a transcript of sportscenter.
posted by justgary at 01:16 PM on January 28, 2002
I'm diehard ESPN.com reader, but my second favorite read is the Sporting News, by a large margin over SI. of course, these are the websites, not the publications, I do read the ESPNmag articles online from time to time, but I seem to enjoy the page2 articles more if i want "edgy" stuff
posted by corpse at 05:04 PM on January 29, 2002
I heard a blurb on NPR about this the other day, and it was a WSJ reporter who was covering it for NPR...I gotta be honest, I was never a big SI fan, and I probably would not read ESPN's magazine either. ESPN.com is great (I tape NHL2Nite every night), as well as the show. Did anyone else hear that CNNSI.com would cease operations? I am having trouble finding a link.
posted by adampsyche at 07:31 AM on January 30, 2002
AOL Plans to Shutter CNN/SI This Fall, Regardless of Outcome of NBA Proposal
posted by owillis at 07:35 AM on January 30, 2002
ESPN the mag feels like the MTV version of SI, so I can understand it gaining in popularity. That said, I prefer SI by a long shot, but then again, I prefer old school in just about everything.