Take it easy, Bill

I just finished reading Bill Simmons' latest column, in which he discusses Bill Belichick's decision to go on fourth-and-two last Sunday night.

The column was going great, Simmons using his everyman wit to entertain. Then he got a little crazy.

While comparing his trying to get from Seattle to Beaverton, Ore., in two hours to Belichick's decision (already on thin ice), Simmons mentioned he was optimistic about the trip in part because he stood up for Sonics fans when Clay Bennett moved the team. Therefore, Simmons felt he had a pretty good shot at getting out of a speeding ticket in the Seattle area.

Seriously dude?

Listen, I respect Simmons. He's an excellent writer, he churns out content at a meaty pace and usually gives sports junkies a fresh perspective. But he's gotten a bit big for his britches.

Now this guy breaks the speed limit with the idea that he's such a big celebrity that a cop will let him go? Relax buddy. No one's confusing you for Tom Brady just yet.

Simmons' charm has always been that he's just like you and me, just a regular Joe Fan saying what we'd all like to say about the sports issue of the day. That's pretty much over now. Simmons does a lot of name-dropping, and apparently he doesn't view himself as Joe Fan anymore.

This doesn't mean Simmons doesn't write a good column anymore, because he does. He continues to provide good content, and his fan base continues to grow.

So does his ego.


  1. You have a great sports blog here. This is my first time visiting but I'm liking it! I have two sports blogs myself. We need to stick together. I'd like us to exchange links to help spread some traffic around to each other.

    Let me know if this is possible.


  2. I'm a big Simmons fan, but this was his worst column in a long while. It was nonsensical. I was particularly bemused when he tried to argue that "the number of times a team started and completed three touchdown drives in the fourth quarter to erase a double-digit deficit and win an NFL game since 2005" was a remotely valuable statistic in analyzing the potential final drive. a) Of course that hasn't happened a lot - so what? b) The first two touchdowns HAD ALREADY HAPPENED! That's like saying "it's nearly impossible for this quarter to land on tails this time because it landed on heads the last two times." Idiot.

  3. Excellent post. You are dead on about the three long drives argument. Nothing could matter less than those first two scores after they've happened. I'm actually surprised he put that in a column so many people read. It's plain dumb. It's the kind of stuff that makes laugh at a casino if I'm playing roulette. People bet black because it's come up red five times in a row. Then they can't believe it comes up red again. Hey guys, it's 50-50 every time.