Why this site is so negative

com_NCB_Top30_081013_PearlWashington

I was at the Sports Illustrated office today, speaking with Richard Deitsch, SI.com’s excellent media critic, about blogging. He was asking me about why I blog, what I like about blogging, etc, when I uttered a sentence I’d never before said aloud: “The blog is my vent.”

There. I said it. The blog is my vent. My chance to moan, to whine, to complain, to gripe, to rip. If you read my work on SI.com, I’d say 80 percent of the columns are either neutral or positive. OK, maybe 40 percent. But, if you come here, I’m pretty harsh. Randy Johnson is a jerk. Brit Hume is a tool. Sarah Palin stinks. On and on and on and on. Whine after whine after whine. Why? Because it feels good to get stuff off my chest. For 11 hours per day, I sit in a coffee shop, working on my book. I love the gig—absolutely love it—but it can be extremely isolating. Hence, every so often I feel the need to scream. Or, to blog.

I understand the criticisms, and I genuinely appreciate most of them. The only one I don’t like is when people say, “He’s a typical writer—going off on things he doesn’t even care about.” I make this promise to anyone here: If I blog about it, I believe it. Pirate fans clearly think I’m a tool, but the Nady trade was terrible. Big Unit fans object, but he is not a particularly nice man. Those are my opinions, and the blog is my opportunity to express them.

That said, maybe I’ll try being more positive. The salad I just ate was lovely. I’m very happy for Andre Dawson. My cell phone seems to be working. Heinz Ketchup is great atop burgers. My mother and father are wonderful. The Knicks are playing great. George Clooney deserves an Oscar for Up In The Air. Snoop Dogg’s new single rocks. The New Jersey Nets will … will … will … will …

Damn. They suck. They truly suck.

Hell, I tried.

6 thoughts on “Why this site is so negative”

  1. I also think part of it is that while we can’t necessarily always be Little Mary Sunshine in our jobs, we also can’t write articles that say “Randy Johnson is a jerk” or, as I twittered something along the lines of today, “I have no problem with David Segui’s steroid use as much as I have a problem with the fact that he’s a total douchebag.”

    I think someone voting for David Segui to the HOF shocked me out of my Puff Mommy complacency there on that one … let’s see if I am still employed tomorrow.

    But this is YOUR blog (and a fantastic one it is). It’s a place you can say what you feel and not for a paycheck or on another company’s masthead.

    Don’t change a thing. Please. I always get that little frisson of excitement every time I click on your bookmark.

  2. Oh, and one more thing … for some reason I’m not totally shocked about Alomar. I am DELIGHTED for Dawson …

    But I am very upset by how few votes Fred McGriff got (fewer than McGwire) …

    Compare McGriff’s career numbers to those of Dawson and that gives me hope that, eventually, he will indeed make it into the HOF.

    But it may take awhile because he didn’t make headlines, he wasn’t an ass (or even a douchebag), and he was by all accounts totally clean.

  3. You also get to share the unadulterated truth in your blog…would SI give you 5,000 words to write about how Randy Johnson is a jerk, even if it’s 100% true (it is)?

    This is the same mag that pays Jon Heyman to occasionally attempt some analysis about baseball! They may be your paycheck, but your blog is a hundred times more interesting, speaking as a reader, and that’s because of those unfiltered opinions and the fact that you’re obviously passionate about them.

  4. I second Lisa and Shane’s sentiment. Keep it up Jeff, your blog is interesting because you don’t pull any punches. Don’t start now…

  5. I agree with the others, love the blog. I often don’t agree with what you say. But I love hearing you vent about issues you believe in and ramble about some random pop-culture or family trivia. Thanks for the Pearl half courter screen shot too.

    Was that a birthday shout-out?

Leave a Reply