Hey gang,
I just wanted to give you all a heads up that I'm now covering the Giants for The Athletic. I don't know if any of you have checked out the site yet, as it only launched in New York recently. It's a subscription site (groan), but the trade off should be more analytical/thoughtful coverage for a small fee instead of the click bait/hot takes that other sites need to produce to satisfy advertisers. For instance, one of my first pieces was a film review of
Ogletree.
If you want to check it out, there's a free one-week trial and
here is a link that gives you a 30 percent discount on a one-year subscription ($3.49/month).
Also, feel free to pass along suggestions for what type of coverage you want to read more of because I have a pretty blank canvas to shape how I cover the team.
Thanks.
However, on principle I won't pay for sports or any other news on the internet. Heck, no one even pays for porn on the internet anymore, I am skeptical of anyone who pays for sports writing.
but good luck though.
I’d pay the subscription fees for good reporting and insightful analysis. Maybe that’s what you’ll bring to the Athletic. Good luck!
I pay for the Ahtletic and its worth every penny. It's so refreshing being able to read in-depth content without clickbait or ads or slideshows or auto-play vidoes and other crap. They have particularly deep national coverage of NHL, NCAAF, and NCAAB and have full-time salaried beat writer on staff for each NY team. I expect the site to continue to grow.
I’d pay the subscription fees for good reporting and insightful analysis. Maybe that’s what you’ll bring to the Athletic. Good luck!
I mean, what do you want him to say? They've missed the playoffs 6 out of the last 7 seasons and finished 3-13 this year.
I’d pay the subscription fees for good reporting and insightful analysis. Maybe that’s what you’ll bring to the Athletic. Good luck!
Thanks!
I wouldn't argue that my tone on Twitter can probably skew negative. A) I'm fairly snarky. B) I'm covering a team that was a disaster last season.
If you think my coverage NJ.com was about going for clicks, the good news is that's the opposite of what we're going for at The Athletic. I'd recommend doing the week trial and seeing what you think.
Good luck Dan
Good luck Dan
Well done with the Porky's reference.
Thanks for popping in and telling us about it, Dan. Best of luck in the new venture.
As far as ideas for the Giants, obviously with the draft coming up, the chatter is hot and heavy about it here. By this time, the die hards that are going to subscribe have probably heard/read it all about the top guys in the first round. But I think there is a good opportunity to analyze 2nd-4th round talent at positions of need. Perhaps comparing some of the second tier RBs to the standard-bearer, Saquon Barkley and what they do well relative to him and what they don't do nearly as well relative to him.
You could go into other positions as well, analyzing some mid-round receivers, for instance, or players that would fit more naturally into Bettcher's 3-4 such as quick OLB/edge rushers such as Malik Jefferson or Darius Leonard.
Again, best of luck!
eh.
NYTimes is $8 and WashPo is $10 for a lot more content that I trust to be quality reporting.
eh.
NYTimes is $8 and WashPo is $10 for a lot more content that I trust to be quality reporting.
Thanks. And it's $3.49 per month if you click on this link. I believe that offer ends today, but you get a one-week trial before committing.
Content like that can separate from the other sites out there, but it also isn't going to be for all fans.
But then again - I know you'll automatically limit the pool of people with a subscription service. I know a lot of people that will refuse to pay for content no matter how good it is.
Quote:
$9 a month?
eh.
NYTimes is $8 and WashPo is $10 for a lot more content that I trust to be quality reporting.
Thanks. And it's $3.49 per month if you click on this link. I believe that offer ends today, but you get a one-week trial before committing.
Yeah but you have to pay for the full year upfront! Not a lot of money, I just have to watch with all the subs I sign up for here and there. They tend to add up.
I've subscribed to The Athletic since they lured Josh Yohe over, that site is great.
I know people hate paying for it, but I got it as a gift over the holidays.
Way I see it, back in the day most of us probably subscribed to magazines right?
So what's the difference?
What makes the Athletic great is they have both local and national news, you can really know everything. Also, all their columns are not fluff.
They are about quality not quantity and I have heard just as much from writers who have switched over.
Just about everything I read there is really thoughtful but not excessively long.
Also, they do the best job of covering hockey out of any site, paid or unpaid.
I'd highly recommend.
type-o -- I got 40% off.
+1
Giving this a try, thanks for posting the info Dan
Quote:
But, is it just me or do you tend to crap on the Giants? I don’t expect you to be a straight up homer but it seems like you have an ax to grind or you’re going for clicks by writing inflammatory opinions.
I’d pay the subscription fees for good reporting and insightful analysis. Maybe that’s what you’ll bring to the Athletic. Good luck!
Thanks!
I wouldn't argue that my tone on Twitter can probably skew negative. A) I'm fairly snarky. B) I'm covering a team that was a disaster last season.
If you think my coverage NJ.com was about going for clicks, the good news is that's the opposite of what we're going for at The Athletic. I'd recommend doing the week trial and seeing what you think.
I like your takes Dan. Thanks a lot for your work.