Peyton Manning SI Sportsman (Moneymaker) of The Year

Federer shouldn't have won this year, but if you win three out of four majors, you should win the award in most years.

I love Mariano Rivera, but I don't see it this year. A reliever on a team that didn't make the playoffs? I know he's the best reliever ever and he had a great final season, but that shouldn't translate into Sportsman of the Year.

If they had done something like, "The athletes of Boston" that would have been a fine choice, but they kind of already did that cover.

 

I suppose it was a safe choice in a year when no single person dominated. Hey, at least it wasn't Lance Armstrong.

 

Slap in the face to whom? Federer? He doesn't give a flying fuck. He doesn't get Sports Illustrated and he doesn't care about the United States.

 

Probably a slap in the face to SI that someone can dominate their sport for as long as he did and be arguably the greatest of all-time and not win it. Federer has been to tennis what Tiger Woods has been to golf.

 

It's a slap in the face to SI that SI didn't name Federer its Sportsman of the Year?

Man, you just get smarter every day, don't you?

 

I guess some people make too much of it. I couldn't give two rats asses what Sports Illustrated thinks. Their opinion is theirs and that's fine. But even I can see how much Federer accomplished. If you can't, I'll try to enlighten you sometime.

 

My question is only about whose face is being slapped.

Clearly it should be yours.

 

Wow, take it easy cowboy.

I said it would be a slap in face to Federer that he never won. Perhaps I should have said Federer fans (in the United States, of course, because they're the only ones who give a flying fuck, as you succinctly put it) or maybe tennis fans in general. It never goes to anyone but players in the NFL and NBA.

 

Gator, that post was aimed solely at Mark, and it was about his idiocy and not Federer's merit. Apologies if you thought you were in the crossfire.

I just don't know why it would offend Federer or be that "slap in the face." The award (which is not really an award) is clearly catered to Americans, and Federer has never been that big here. Nor has America ever been that big to Federer. There is no question that he was the greatest athlete in the world at some point in the past 10 years, but given what the whole award is, I don't see anyone getting worked up. Someone mentioned the Dwyane Wade one, and yeah, that was about the time they went from "worthy candidate who as an added bonus will sell some magazines" to "who cares, we need to move some product and please a business partner." Since then it's obviously going to be someone from the Big Three or an Olympian.

 

Everything I've ever heard from friends in the industry (one I've long since left) is that everyone at SI wanted Federer to get the "award" the year Wade won, and it was because Terry McDonnell wanted Wade instead. I'd say that was the year the award stopped being anything other than newsstand catnip. But seriously, who cares? I see Dave Zirin throwing a tantrum today and advocating Serena Williams as a more fitting choice, and how can anyone argue with that logic? Maybe she could bump a fellow finalist on the way to the podium at the dinner, then tell everyone she's stuff the trophy down their effing throats like she did that poor lines woman at the US Open. Whenever I think Serena, sporting is what comes to mind. That and Stuebenville rape shaming.

 

Next year they'll probably give it to Kate Upton. It's the logical endpoint of SI as an institution.

 

Why?