Mushnick!

Versatile, Ruckus and Bodie would make an awesome rap trio.

 

I can kick it. Yes, I can.

 

Vers: I would definitely add Greg Bishop to that list, as well as the Wall Street Journal guys (if they're considered NYC guys and not national): Jason Gay, Kevin Clark, Tom Perrotta, Rachel Bachman.

 

I have Gay on there. I couldn't remember Bachman's first name and thought Perrotta was just an occasional tennis contributor.

And while I would rather read Bishop than Phil Mushnick, I didn't want to include the entire Times staff and he's not one of my favorites.

 

There's no doubt the new York City market has some great columnists, and you list several personal favorites of mine, but -- and maybe I misunderstood what you were trying to say -- I thought we were talking about writers who "wrote for Mushnick's audience."

And, maybe I took it a step further, but what I was looking for was someone who could do a better job writing Mushnick's column. Someome who would cover these "issues" better.

Now, Mushnick might harp on a few topics -- save rule, black uniforms, Cablevision, Francesa, ticket prices, late start times for games, etc. -- who besides Mushnick even touches on these issues?

Sandomir covers Cablevision disputes and the like, and Bob Raissman writes essentially the same column for readers who topped out athe fourth grade reading level over at the Daily News, but otherwise, most of Mushnick's topics go uncovered elsewhere.

When there was talk Rush Limbaugh might be a minority investor in the St. Louis Rams, you couldn't swing a dead cat without hitting a columnist or other social commentator who was voicing his opinion on the matter.

Who besides Mushnick has written about Jay-Z's investment in the Nets in terms that weren't celebratory?

And, let's be clear, while Jay-Z owns only 0.6% of the team, he's no passive, minority investor. He's the public face of the team. He's at the center of their marketing efforts. He's been charged with branding the team, and has "designed" their logo and uniform, and he was the one assigned to recruit LeBron James when he was a free agent.

Now, maybe you don't agree with Mushnick suggesting an alternate nickname for the team, but should the press examine the role Jay-Z plays, especially given his lyrics?

We've seen NBA players (Amare Stoudemire & Kobe Bryant) fined for making gay slurs. And the NHL nearly ran Sean Avery out of the league for comments that were judged as disrespectful to women.

And those instances got tons of press coverage.

But we should just celebrate Jay-Z's involvement with the Nets?

Why shouldn't someone in the press examine it?

Who else writes about ticket prices, the start times of games, or the rearranging of the schedule to accommodate fans (i.e. shifting an MLB or NFL game planned for the afternoon, to prime time)? Or PSLs or the gouging of fans by making them purchase tickets to pre-season games, or bundling tickets to the most attractive games with tickets to less attractive games, or even tickets to other events?

As more and more media outlets become "partners" with the entities they are charged to cover (or are owned outright by them), Mushnick's criticism's become more valuable.

Will Grantland (ESPN) or Sports on Earth (co-owned by MLB) allow its writers to go after Bud Selig the way the Post allows Mushnick to?

Maybe you'd like to argue that Mushnick is terrible at what he does. Fine. Go for it. But until someone does it better, I'll support Mushnick.

 

Are gangs not a big enough problem in our society that the issues involved in pandering to their "culture" should be ignored?

Over 50 people were shot in the last four days in Chicago. Nearly all of them were a result of gang violence.

Gang "culture" is among the biggest problems our nation faces right now. You might site gun violence, drugs, failing schools, the breakdown of the nuclear family in the inner city, or other problems as bigger, but "gang culture" causes and/or exacerbates all of these problems.

So, I think it's a fair question whether or not our sports leagues and teams, and our (often Public) Universities should be pandering too, and encouraging this culture.

 

I'll come back to this thread when I'm done with work and discuss all those points, YankeeFan, but I don't really appreciate you putting words in my mouth. At what point did I say my list would comprise writers who would better write Phil Mushnick's column? At what point did I say I think Mushnick is bad at his job? It's easier to yell when you extrapolate on the words on the screen, I suppose.

 

Mushnick goes from black = gangs without any proof.

Black is my favorite color (I'm a white suburban female.) Walk into any yoga, Pilates or Zumba class in any gym, and you'll find it awash in black. Ever hear of the LBD? In fashion, black sell$.

It happens to be a very popular, very common, very slimming, and yes very badass color.

Saying it's all about gangs is too much of a leap.

 

That's fine, and, as I said, I may have taken your comments a step too far.

But, Mushnick does write a specific column, and has for years. So, to say their are 30 better columnists in New York is, I guess, irrelevant if they're writing different columns.

Tyler Kepner is a great baseball columnist. Could he do a better job than Mushnick, if given the same basic assignment? I don't know. And, I don't know if Mushnick could fill Kepner's shoes.

But, before we dismiss Mushnick as an old man shouting at clouds, I think we need to decide if his column (or a column like it) is useful, and if there's anyone doing it better?

 

To ask if anyone is doing it better is the wrong question. The better question is, Is Mushnick's Column Necessary?

 

The fact you like Black is anecdotal. That urban youth, and gang members, like black uniforms, hats, jerseys, etc. is an issue that's been studied. This isn't some random theory Mushnick came up with.

The Oakland Raiders had the market cornered for years.

Marketing experts at Nike and other companies learned years ago that not only did gang members like certain colors and designs, but that they were taste makers in their communities.

When gang leaders, or drug dealers wore certain items of clothing, other members in the community did so too.

And, suburban whites, who liked to mimic urban culture did too.

It's not that the "gang market" it is huge, it's that they are trend setters. And, there is no doubt they've been marketed to.

 

Didn't I say that was one of the two questions?

I think it's a fair question. And, I think the answer is a resounding yes.

Who else writes about sports on a regular basis from the sports consumer's point of view?

In an era where much to much sports writing is cheer leading, Mushnick gives another point of view.