Deford's confessions in SI

[Machine Head]

Mr Head,

No malice intended in the ding ding ding.

I remember going to the English seaside when I was a kid, hearing that a side show had "the world's smallest water otter." I paid and when I got in, there was a teapot no bigger than a postage stamp. Hope you didn't think Irvy was alive.

This was another goofy is-it-sports story from back in the same vintage (not Deford).

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1084395/index.htm

The Connors piece would be up there. Ditto the original Tilden feature.

o-<

No offense taken, Mr. Friend. I just found myself doing something that's always been a pet peeve of mine around here - posting on a thread without reading prior responses. Guess I'm not as perfect as I thought.

Here's Irvy's rig at the 4:10 mark:

Jerry Reed and Jackie Gleason kick it off.

 

[Boomer7]

The biggest problem with this week's article was how it was presented -- as someone else noted, there were no "confessions" in "Confessions of a Sportswriter." What's more, the cheesy line at the bottom of the first page -- (I'm paraphrasing here) This is one story he never expected to write -- was really stupid and needlessly melodramatic. It was a fairly interesting series of anecdotes of a long, distinguished career; why did SI feel the need to package it as if it were a suspense flick?

 

[fishhack2009]

The biggest problem with this week's article was how it was presented -- as someone else noted, there were no "confessions" in "Confessions of a Sportswriter." What's more, the cheesy line at the bottom of the first page -- (I'm paraphrasing here) This is one story he never expected to write -- was really stupid and needlessly melodramatic. It was a fairly interesting series of anecdotes of a long, distinguished career; why did SI feel the need to package it as if it were a suspense flick?

I thought the same thing... I kept waiting for the "confessions." It was a nice piece, the reminiscences of one of the giants in our business... but it was definitely misrepresented and overhyped.

 

[Fran Curci]

Some idiot in this string calls Deford "a pompous tool" and others question how cushy he has it. Let's see, the guy is 71 and works for NPR and Real Sports and Sports Illustrated. He has written 15 books (some are collections of his columns, some are novels, some are non-fiction), including a novel in 2007 that is damn good. He appears frequently on other TV and radio programs. Does public speaking, too. Otherwise, he's just coasting. (Also, he's one of the nicest guys you'd want to meet.)

 

[cranberry]

Some tool on this thread called someone else an idiot for calling someone else a pompous tool!

 

[Fran Curci]

Cute. Except that I was right.

 

[Pencil Dick]

Read the Deford piece last night. Not his best, but I read every word of it.

Glad SI gave him the space for something like this to run.

 

[Joe Williams]

People might be taking the "confessions" thing too literally. There are all sorts of examples in the culture where that phrase is used -- "Confessions of a (fill in the blank)..." -- and it often isn't accompanied by blow-the-lid-off dirt. It's just a device for letting you know you're going to get some inside-baseball stuff, some scenes from behind a curtain. Doesn't have to be blockbuster or expose anything.

I suppose "Tales of..." would work. But that's a little tame to get noticed in this cluttered media world.

 

[clutchcargo]

Frank Deford is a great guy and a great writer. Still.

I rest my case.

 

[Ben_Hecht]

It's always good to see him at Saratoga.

 

[SportsDude]

My guess, the "confession" was getting his "Toughest Coach" story from a discarded newspaper he found during his trip to write about Bryant - he credited the original writer in the new SI story, then went on to discuss how he gave "acclaim" to this hereto unknown coach. Maybe that was "news," maybe it wasn't, because I don't go back quite that far. That's my guess, because the article was particularly vague in more ways than one. Still, I'll take bad Deford, mailed-in Deford, or sleep-induced Deford over 90-percent of the stuff out there.

 

[friend of the friendless]

Sirs, Madames,

I'm going back but I think that "discovery" of the Sullivan story was out there soon after publication.

o-<

 

[Small Town Guy]

That's been known about the Sullivan story since it was published in SI, and Deford's long acknowledged he saw it in the paper.

 

[clutchcargo]

That's been known about the Sullivan story since it was published in SI, and Deford's long acknowledged he saw it in the paper.

How much enterprise that's ever appeared in SI truly originated with one of their own staffers?

 

[Small Town Guy]

That's been known about the Sullivan story since it was published in SI, and Deford's long acknowledged he saw it in the paper.

How much enterprise that's ever appeared in SI truly originated with one of their own staffers?

I'm sure there's some, but it's not like it's a discredit to a magazine piece if it first appeared in a newspaper or on TV or whatever, if the writer expands on it or simply writes it better.

It's not like it's unique to SI; what's really original? Countless classic stories started when someone saw it elsewhere. Capote saw the In Cold Blood killings in the New York Times. It's not like the book loses points simply because the idea didn't start with Capote getting a tip from a police officer in Kansas about some killings.

The tragedies of John Wideman's family were well-known, but Smith's piece on Jamila Wideman is still a classic. And on and on.

I am pretty sure that Plimpton didn't see the curious case of Sidd Finch in any newspaper before his SI story.

 

[Versatile]

I would argue it would say something horrible about local journalism if national papers picked up major stories first on a consistent basis.

 

[Joe Williams]

To me, rather than counting against the magazine writer, it says more about the originating reporter and what he or she didn't do with a story that was good enough to be pursued and opened up by a national magazine or Web site. I know local newspapers reporters are awfully busy, though, and may not have access to forums bigger than their daily papers.

But turning what we do into a comments-board game of "First!" achieves nothing.

 

[BTExpress]

Worry about getting it right, not getting it first.

Lessons we've been ignoring for a century or more.

 

[friend of the friendless]

Mr Williams,

To me, rather than counting against the magazine writer, it says more about the originating reporter and what he or she didn't do with a story that was good enough to be pursued and opened up by a national magazine or Web site. I know local newspapers reporters are awfully busy, though, and may not have access to forums bigger than their daily papers.

But turning what we do into a comments-board game of "First!" achieves nothing.

I don't know that the fellah with the Scooba Dispatch could have got more than 20 inches for a Sullivan feature.

o-<

 

[TheSportsPredictor]

If Frank Deford had thrown in a Karate Kid reference, paralleled all his experience with a trip to Vegas, told us what type of latte he was drinking while doing all of it, and not used the word "I" so many times, why, he just might have been able to make something out of that article.