|
Is Simmons actually starting a website? I got the feeling that it's just going to be a TV show and his podcasts from here on out. He kind of joked about being retired from writing.
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 17:08 |
|
|
Niwrad posted:Is Simmons actually starting a website? I got the feeling that it's just going to be a TV show and his podcasts from here on out. He kind of joked about being retired from writing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 22:16
|
|
|
Deadspin is implying that Simmons basically tanked it from the outside. That seems over the top even for him. http://deadspin.com/how-grantland-d...dium=socialflow
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
quote:In retrospect, the editorial exodus looks to have been more or less the end. One Grantlander says that no one knew the four editors were leaving to join Simmons until the day they left. That’s because, another source says, Simmons has been warring with ESPN both by acting as a source for writer Jim Miller, and by more nefarious means. Very professional, nice work. http://deadspin.com/how-grantland-died-1739682579
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 22:18
|
|
Tater Love 
|
Kalli posted:Mays tweeted that Bill Simmons has pretty much already offered him and Barnwell jobs. I didn't see this tweet, are you talking about him recounting the story of how Simmons hired him to Grantland?
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 22:20
|
|
|
So ESPN blames Simmons for at-will employees quitting at-will? Seems if they were that valuable to the operation, you'd have them under contract. Like I get that ESPN is upset they are getting destroyed on social media today, but it's ironic when a major company that loves at-will employment cries when they get burned by it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 22:24
|
|
|
I wonder who at ESPN wrote that article for Greg Howard. It might as well be a press release saying "It isn't our fault, blame Bill Simmons." How can they cry he got 4 people to leave 3 weeks before they shut it down? People aren't stupid. They knew it was going to be shut down and hit the door hard and fast. If ESPN thought editors mattered they wouldn't have them as at will employees. ESPN acted like passive aggressive babies for the last 5 months and now they want to complain about Simmons poaching talent? Maybe don't treat everyone like children by deleting mentions of any former employees in a podcast and then suspending the "offenders" on the fly (I am 100% convinced this is what happened to the Barnwell and Mays podcast). Gee, I wonder why no one is loyal to you 
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 22:24
|
|
|
zakharov posted:Very professional, nice work. At the least that would explain why Jim Miller seemed to know so much lately.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 22:26
|
|
|
I tend to believe most stuff Howard writes but the entire "Simmons required them to blindside ESPN" info is from a single source, one employed by ESPN. At this point both sides are probably leaking smut like crazy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 22:29
|
|
|
Simmons is super petty and close with Miller, so that actually seems a little plausible. Holly Anderson kinda implied that he's been trying to get back at ESPN too, with the remains of Grantland caught in the middle. e: I don't blame the people for leaving without notice though; at-will goes both ways and it's dumb to not have a position that important under contract when you're ESPN. MourningView fucked around with this message at 22:40 on Oct 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
BWV posted:I tend to believe most stuff Howard writes but the entire "Simmons required them to blindside ESPN" info is from a single source, one employed by ESPN. At this point both sides are probably leaking smut like crazy. I mean, even if Simmons orchestrated the move to do max damage to ESPN, they did they same trying to bury Simmons and kill his reputation after they fired him.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
LOL Is it even questionable that Simmons plays the part of a jilted lover in this whole thing?
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 22:47
|
|
|
Blast Fantasto posted:At the least that would explain why Jim Miller seemed to know so much lately. At this point I'm pretty sure John Walsh is one of his sources. If I'm recalling the oral history book correctly, Walsh and Skipper never cared for each other and Skipper is presiding over what is possibly the worst period in ESPN's history (putting a guy who was in a dying industry in charge of a business that was going to be facing significant headwinds maybe wasn't the smartest choice, Disney). Timby fucked around with this message at 22:53 on Oct 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 22:49
|
|
|
Whatever, I'm just going to miss having that collection of writers in one place.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 22:57
|
|
|
Ribsauce posted:I wonder who at ESPN wrote that article for Greg Howard. It might as well be a press release saying "It isn't our fault, blame Bill Simmons." How can they cry he got 4 people to leave 3 weeks before they shut it down? People aren't stupid. They knew it was going to be shut down and hit the door hard and fast. If ESPN thought editors mattered they wouldn't have them as at will employees. Taking the article at face value, he told the people to not tell anyone they were leaving until they left. This is, in fact, a "douche" move regardless of at-will employment. The standard is to submit a two-weeks notice when employees leave at-will employment to let the company find/hire/train a replacement. Simmons apparently demanded they not submit a notice.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 22:57
|
|
|
quote:As one senior ESPN source told CNN, “We’re getting out of the pop culture business.” That last line right there is the bottom line quote that sums up the entire Simmons-Grantland-ESPN snafu from day one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
People are underestimating how hard John Skipper and co. get when they can redistribute money from Charlie Pierce to Skip Bayless.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
So It Goes posted:Taking the article at face value, he told the people to not tell anyone they were leaving until they left. This is, in fact, a "douche" move regardless of at-will employment. The standard is to submit a two-weeks notice when employees leave at-will employment to let the company find/hire/train a replacement. Simmons apparently demanded they not submit a notice.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:03
|
|
|
Kalli posted:Mays tweeted that Bill Simmons has pretty much already offered him and Barnwell jobs. I hope this is true. I think Barnwell's writing is boring as hell, but I like him in podcast form.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:04
|
|
|
i cannot overstate how little you need to leave a notice if a company doesn't respect you enough to put you under contract
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:04
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:10
|
|
|
I mean they're free to do what they want but I have personally left two weeks notice from at-will jobs I've quit as does pretty much everyone I know who is a working professional and doesn't have a vindictive desire to burn bridges and references, not to mention not desiring to harm former co-workers who have to take up your work you left them with no notice in the meantime (even assuming the company isn't going to close soon). It's not about whether its mandatory or not, that's not the point. I do live in a very heavy employer-friendly state for what its worth (i.e. the south).
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:11
|
|
|
ESPN is a billion dollar media conglomerate that had almost a year to put these important editors under contract. To act like they got outwitted by the conniving Bill Simmons either shows incompetence or they are just lying.So It Goes posted:Taking the article at face value, he told the people to not tell anyone they were leaving until they left. This is, in fact, a "douche" move regardless of at-will employment. The standard is to submit a two-weeks notice when employees leave at-will employment to let the company find/hire/train a replacement. Simmons apparently demanded they not submit a notice. ESPN can fire those editors at any time for any reason without a severance package. Why does an employee owe an employer two weeks when the employer won't do the same? If you want employee security, give them a contract. You owe them as much as they owe you which is poo poo under that agreement. I mean if you have a good employer who treated you well by all means give 2 weeks. I've done when I've left jobs. But ESPN chose that working relationship and chose to not give their employees job security. Can't blame them for looking out for themselves. ESPN is doing that by firing a ton of people.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
So It Goes posted:I mean they're free to do what they want but I have personally left two weeks notice from at-will jobs I've quit as does pretty much everyone I know who is a working professional and doesn't have a vindictive desire to burn bridges and references. It's not about whether its mandatory or not, that's not the point. I do live in a very heavy employer-friendly state for what its worth (i.e. the south). I live in an employee-friendly state and it's the same here, you don't burn bridges for no reason unless you're an idiot. Of course if you're just at entry level it doesn't matter what you do, but anywhere above there pissing off your boss (who is probably better connected than you or they wouldn't be your boss) on your way out is only ever going to result in bad things for you. In a case like the ex-Grantland editors where they're already nice and secure with a new and better job and their ex-bosses are kind of a laughingstock around the industry to begin with, yeah, they can feel free to go wild in that case.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:15
|
|
|
So It Goes posted:I mean they're free to do what they want but I have personally left two weeks notice from at-will jobs I've quit as does pretty much everyone I know who is a working professional and doesn't have a vindictive desire to burn bridges and references, not to mention not desiring to harm former co-workers who have to take up your work you left them with no notice in the meantime (even assuming the company isn't going to close soon). It's not about whether its mandatory or not, that's not the point. I do live in a very heavy employer-friendly state for what its worth (i.e. the south). You realize you're talking about a company that just made a giant "gently caress with everybody's lives" announcement via press release, right?
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
Big picture this makes sense for ESPN. And here is some admittedly speculative analysis : Quality and thorough sports writing with a concern for Pop culture inevitably leads to discussions (regarding politics, race, gender/sexuality, etc) that ESPN would prefer to avoid. ESPN wants to get as many viewers as possible and make its corporate and league partners as happy as possible. Having a site of smart people given carte Blanche to write about sports and culture will inevitably lead to criticism that upsets these two core constituencies I'm not saying at all that this is what caused grantland to end. But somewhere down the line Grantland's interest (and really any editorial project like outside the lines) in employing good writers was going to rub up against ESPNs desire to showcase morons and please corporate/league partners. And in their opinion no project, especially one that doesn't make any money, is worth causing these conflicts.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
You give two weeks so they don't poo poo talk you when you're trying to find another job. If you already have a job lined up with someone who hates your current employer then who gives a gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
It is pretty dumb to expect someone to extend a courtesy to an organization that has no intention of doing the same to them. If companies are going to reap the benefit of having employees as at-will then they can suck it up and take the extremely minor in comparison downsides of that as well. ESPN apparently didn't give any of their current editors notice that they were shutting the site down so they could go find new jobs in the meantime.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Totally different divisions. Which is the problem, corporate money bullshit. "oh no, ESPN is going to run out of money" *Star Wars and Marvel franchises print money*
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
MourningView posted:It is pretty dumb to expect someone to extend a courtesy to an organization that has no intention of doing the same to them. If companies are going to reap the benefit of having employees as at-will then they can suck it up and take the extremely minor in comparison downsides of that as well. ESPN apparently didn't give any of their current editors notice that they were shutting the site down so they could go find new jobs in the meantime. It's not even 100% about whether they not owe ESPN specifically. Assuming those 4 editors actually did significant work and weren't worthless, I imagine the remaining editors at Grantland itself did not appreciate having to work 20 extra hours for the following month when the 4 editors that left could've just simply given notice instead of following Simmons grudges (assuming they did not in fact quit the same day/week Simmons said he'd hire them). I'm not saying the editors should have stayed on any longer than the did, it just don't see how it isn't douchey to not give notice of your plan to leave that wasn't some spur of the moment thing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
So It Goes posted:It's not even 100% about whether they not owe ESPN specifically. Assuming those 4 editors actually did significant work and weren't worthless, I imagine the remaining editors at Grantland itself did not appreciate having to work 20 extra hours for the following month when the 4 editors that left could've just simply given notice instead of following Simmons grudges (assuming they did not in fact quit the same day/week Simmons said he'd hire them). I'm not saying the editors should have stayed on any longer than the did, it just don't see how it isn't douchey to not give notice of your plan to leave that wasn't some spur of the moment thing. I hear where you're coming from but preying on a normal person's tendency to feel guilty for screwing their co-workers (even indirectly) is exactly the kind of thing rear end in a top hat companies do. At some point you have to say "forget it, I owe this company nothing, if it increases your workload and you don't quit that's on you but this company sucks and I'm out right now."
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:24
|
|
|
So It Goes posted:Taking the article at face value, he told the people to not tell anyone they were leaving until they left. This is, in fact, a "douche" move regardless of at-will employment. The standard is to submit a two-weeks notice when employees leave at-will employment to let the company find/hire/train a replacement. Simmons apparently demanded they not submit a notice. Refreshing to see someone stand up for the billion dollar megacorp that ships jobs overseas and announces layoffs out of the blue
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:24
|
|
|
ESPN is obsolete without broadcast rights. Why not not try to branch out with different content. The "E" stands for "Entertainment"! 
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:24
|
|
|
Alexander Hamilton posted:You give two weeks so they don't poo poo talk you when you're trying to find another job. If you already have a job lined up with someone who hates your current employer then who gives a gently caress. It is illegal to do that
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
Alexander Hamilton posted:You give two weeks so they don't poo poo talk you when you're trying to find another job. If you already have a job lined up with someone who hates your current employer then who gives a gently caress. No major companies poo poo talk former employees anymore. Too easy to get sued. They just have HR say "they worked here from this date to this date".
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:27
|
|
|
The lost job I worked at was at will and I gave them a two week notice and then they just terminated my contract two days later.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:28
|
|
|
Niwrad posted:No major companies poo poo talk former employees anymore. Too easy to get sued. They just have HR say "they worked here from this date to this date". 
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:28
|
|
|
So It Goes posted:Taking the article at face value, he told the people to not tell anyone they were leaving until they left. This is, in fact, a "douche" move regardless of at-will employment. The standard is to submit a two-weeks notice when employees leave at-will employment to let the company find/hire/train a replacement. Simmons apparently demanded they not submit a notice. Are you dumb or just being intentionally obtuse? This isn't anywhere near to a "standard" situation, so whatever Stockholm Syndrome engendered protocol you think applies here is irrelevant.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:39
|
|
|
If a company treats you and other employees well, you should give them 2 weeks (Actually for managers/editors I'd try to do more if I could). Most companies offer some sort of severance if you are laid off (as opposed to fired for being a putz), so fair is fair. You aren't required to do this, but its a pretty human thing to do, it saves your co-workers hassle most of the time, and in most situations if your new position won't accept you taking two weeks to get your old job poo poo tied up that should be a pretty big red flag. If your company is lovely and treats employees like crap, yeah you don't owe them anything. I have no idea how those Editors felt. Sometimes people in creative fields don't give notice because they are trying to collect up their own IP as much as possible, dunno if that was the case with these guys either.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 17:08 |
|
|
African AIDS cum posted:It is illegal to do that No it isn't.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2015 23:44
|
|
