ESPN the Mag vs. SI

I never thought I'd say this, but I think I really like the writing in ESPN the Mag, at least on its meatier pieces.

Started subscribing to the Mag because it came with the access to all the insider blogs on the .com, and got my first issue this week.

Seth Wickersham's piece on the fan who began FOIA-bombing Houston Nutt at Arkansas was fascinating. Loved the piece that they wrote piggybacking the Donaghy issue, about how the NBA has continued to undermine its officials with public reprimands. It's the sort of trend stuff I'd expect to find in SI, but haven't been finding much of lately.

Anybody else with similar feelings?

 

I let both of my subs lapse a while back. I've been very tempted recently to re-up with ESPN.

 

I picked ip SI this past week while waiting for an oil change and was quite disappointed in the presentation. I'm sure I'm not their market base, however.

 

I just reupped SI at 40 bucks a year... It isn't the magazine it was 10 years ago when I started the current subscription run, but still not feeling ESPNTM is a must read either.

 

I can do without the Stuart Scott chats and all the other crap in the mag, and the presentation still is a little over the top to me. But the meatiness of the writing surprised me.

 

The last statement is why I'm back with them. Even survived changes of address.

I can live without the McPaper-like stuff in it, but the long-form pieces are well worth the cost.

 

The LeBron/Jimmy Kimmel cover convinced me to end my ESPN Mag subscription.

 

That's odd...I agree that the mag often has really well-written features, though I wasn't too keen on the Busting a Nutt story. I read it and I never lost focus, so that's good. But it left a lot of basic questions left unanswered, I feel.

 

I have both and both have their advantages.... I can fire through the first 40 pages of ESPN Mag in about 5 minutes - I have no tolerance for Stuart Scott, Mike-N-Mike and all the factoid junk. But the features and writing - with a few navel-gazing, athlete-apologist exceptions - are usually really well done.
SI is SI - I enjoy the front and the back of the magazine. It rarely disappoints, although I have noticed more sloppiness lately (George Rogers v. Johnny Rodgers, etc.)

 

The first things I check in SI are the 2 or 3 double truck photos to start off with, because most of the times they're goddamn fascinating, and then go to the back to see Reilly. This week's Reilly was a bit of the head scratcher.

Like with any publication, some weeks are home runs, other weeks are 4-6-3 double plays, and the rest of the time they're just trying to hit a Gwynn'esque .332 with the occasional bottom-of-the-8th 2-run single that allows Hoffman to come in for the save.

 

I get both mags...and although some of the non-features stuff in ESPN is nothing to be crazy about, I agree that some of their feature writing has been excellent lately, especially the piece on the NBA refereeing mess.

If you can look past the ESPN self-promotional BS, its usually a good read.

 

All together now: Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?