11/21/24
August 01, 2002
Another weekly sports magazine: as Baseball Weekly becomes Sports Weekly. With ESPN, SI, Sporting News and the web - is there really much of a need?
Is this going to be an easy conversion for them? How easy, or difficult, will it be for a publication that's been focused entirely on baseball to start covering football (and, I hope, other sports)? As for owillis's question of need, personally I only read Sports Illustrated, and that only when I'm waiting to get a haircut, so I don't even see the need for ESPN: The Magazine, much less the other mags. But then I get most of my sports info from SportsCenter and the web.
posted by kirkaracha at 06:11 PM on August 01, 2002
What??? You can never have enough sports coverage! How dare you say such things? Seriously, I only look at ESPN Mag and SI, as well as watch SC, and check out espn.com. That pretty much keeps me up-to-date when it comes to sports news. So, a need for another sports mag? Depends on the quality of writing, I suppose.
posted by bcb2k2 at 07:27 PM on August 01, 2002
I don't get the whole sportsmagazine thing. I get all of my sports info from the internet and my friends, and I consider myself pretty well informed. I'll read SI, but only when I'm bored and it happens to be there (like kirkaracha said). You can get all the sports news you need without spending a dime. Why pay for the magazines? Incidentally, my friend Steve says the Cleveland White Sox is the team to beat this year and that their third-baseman, Jason Varitek, is going beat Ed Ott's stolen bases record soon. I can't wait until baseball season starts. Go Cleveland!
posted by Samsonov14 at 08:39 PM on August 01, 2002
I have a pretty limited taste in sports that i follow seriously (nfl and ncaa basketball), but I still subscribe to SI. I subscribe for one reason- Steve Rushin's Air and Space. That's entertainment. May Rick Reilly rot in beer commercial hell.
posted by ttrendel at 11:46 PM on August 01, 2002
rcade I have just the most faint recollection of the National, it never made it up to Seattle without a day or two delay (hello! daily paper!) but in 90 I was in San Fran visiting a college girlfriend's family on summer break. They were hippies and there was no sports on television in that house (in fact i recollect doing lots of work around their house like painting their goddamned garage) but I found the National for the first time. It was sweet. National daily sports newspaper. Best. Idea. Ever.
posted by vito90 at 02:26 AM on August 02, 2002
Woo. Baseball and American football. That sure covers the whole range of sports.
posted by salmacis at 04:36 AM on August 02, 2002
I seriously doubt that this mag will offer anything above and beyond what's already out there four times. But after Maxim got big, did we really need all the spin-offs of that? (FHM, Gene Simmons' Tongue, etc. etc.) The ones that are good will last, the ones that don't will fold (like SI almost did a year or so ago).
posted by Ufez Jones at 08:42 AM on August 02, 2002
I could care less about dead tree publications. I want more stuff on the web. Really, I hit all the major sites and tons of smaller ones during my day reading pretty much every article they post (not the ap or reuters crap). I wish there were more sites with opinion pieces, power polls with descriptions, breakdowns, rumors, etc. I simply cannot get my fill these days.
posted by corpse at 11:39 AM on August 02, 2002
I still miss The National, the daily sports newspaper. So consider my answer a big "yes."