It was an odd thing, really, to read the emails that flooded in, to see people (kindly, sure) ask us if we were OK. We're fine. We were not the person on that panel to be pitied. What more can one do when a man is disturbed than to show him compassion and not sink to his level. (It felt odd to be considered the uncivil person on the panel.) And hey, we get it: The simplest, most obvious emotion that comes when we are faced with what we do not understand is fear, followed quickly by rage. We're not sure what happened to Mr. Bissinger, but, honestly, we're kind of worried about him. And, as people who own all of his books, we say that legitimately; we want him to write more of them.

It was clear from the get-go, from the very first, "I bet you don't know who W.C. Heinz is," that this was not going to be a roundtable exchange of ideas. (Poor Braylon Edwards, honestly. He must be completely bewildered this morning.) It was obvious that Bissinger had been building up to this for a long time, those dark nights wondering what the kids were searching online, those terrifying moments when the world seemed to be spasming out of his control ... they all built up to this. We had seen him backstage, and introduced ourselves. He was, as Jimi Hendrix was famously described, a live wire with too much current running through it. We could see it coming; anyone paying attention couldn't have missed it.

We suppose we could have punched him in the nose or something, called him an asshole, said he was a piece of shit. It might have made for more riveting television; we are certain Costas wouldn't have minded. But that would have been counterproductive. When you see someone flailing desperately at someone, something, anything, there's nothing more to do than sit there, bemused and bewildered, amazed at what was happening, just like everyone else was. We cannot imagine any reasonable human being watching that display and saying, "doggone it, that raving man has a point!" The only way to win a battle like that is to let the audience take in what is happening, and trust them to respond accordingly.

Sure: We would have loved to have made all the points about blogs that we've made countless times before, trot them all out again, in front of a national audience. Had we that opportunity, we surely would have taken advantage of it. But we felt, in a way, the point was made for us. Watching this talented man spin himself into a typhoon of imploding bluster showed the fear, showed the anger, showed the futility of it all. We sat back and watched, and hoped nobody got hurt, just liked you. Honestly: We really hope he's OK. A fight would have done no one any good, least of all him.

We have to take a flight to Los Angeles on Wednesday morning and, as luck would have it, be gone all day today. (Daulerio will be taking over the site until Thursday. We hope he ignores Costas' bizarre misconception and doesn't just post grotesque comments all day, because, you know, that's what bloggers do.) We'll be back Thursday, doing what we do, trying to bring you a little distraction for another workaday. We are not mad at Bissinger, or Costas. We just watched a man immolate on national television. To have piled on the carnage would have been discourteous. The future is obvious to anyone even slightly interested in looking. We just stand aside, as he, as they, watch the light shrink, then fade, then vanish.

(Photo via AOL Fanhouse)

This is fine, of course. That time we knocked our head on the toilet back in 1993 lead us to come up with the concept of the flux capacitor, which inspired our invention of the Interwebs; so, you know, we're not just whistlin' Dixie here. We do know that Costas has mixed feelings (at best) about the series of tubes, Braylon Edwards is an outstanding wide receiver for the Cleveland Browns and Buzz ... well, Buzz has some thoughts about blogs.

Blogs especially, Bissinger says, "disgrace the written word. No one sweats over a sentence anymore, no one really cares if a sentence has good grammar or bad grammar. No one really cares if it has the right or wrong word. Blogs are all about opinion, all about getting in your face, and the fact that people love them says they're really not interested in facts, not interested in beautiful writing; they're just interested in having our own opinions certified.

"With the Internet, there's too much information out there, and we've become a very mindless country. I don't know how else to say it: We really revel in ignorance and disinformation."

So, yeah: This'll be fun. (For the record, we own — and love — every one of Bissinger's books and agree that David Eckstein is scrappy.)

We have no idea how this is gonna go down, but we will do our best to talk slow, make eye contact and try really hard not to embarrass everybody. Godspeed.

Mr. Iracane is the guy who approves and deletes comments around here, and the fellow to whom you should address any comment account requests, and he will explore issues involved in commenting, what makes a great comment thread, what's working, what isn't, answer your questions, so on. We want the place to continue to be as much fun as it is every day, and it's not an execution thread like our friends at Gawker do. We like to be inclusive here, because if we're not, we'd be forced to rely on our own wit and knowledge, and that's a scary thought indeed.

So here's this week's column, in which last week's comments by Bob Costas are discussed. Of course, don't be afraid to let him have it in the comments.

—-—-—-—-—-—-—--

There's been much uproar and hullabaloo in the sportsblogosphere about Bob Costas' anti-blogger screed in the Miami Herald. Costas is the latest in a line of several old media types who have come out against modern communication technology. Who among us could forget Bill Conlin's pompous and bloviating words against Internet bloggers, er, I mean pamphleteers. Way to stay relevant, Bill. Or who doesn't remember the time Schrutebag instigated a DOS attack on The Big Lead? Sure, anyone who prefers Lost over The Sopranos is a boob but that doesn't mean you're allowed to shut his blog down, Colin. There are two differences here, though: (1) Conlin and Cowherd are attacking bloggers, but Costas is attacking the anonymous commenter and (2) Costas is nearly correct.

Anonymous commenting on newspaper websites is the new Wild West, but instead of six-shooters, the commenters are armed with stupidity. And unfortunately, stupidity is contagious. Unless a forum is moderated, this stupidity is allowed to seep through wires and routers and reach a much larger audience than Steve Johannes Gutenberg intended when he invented movable type. Stupidity plus impassioned fandom will always produce an awful comment. But does any of this matter? Let's take a look. Costas specifically mentions Dan Le Batard's column as a launching point for stupidity:

(Now) that pathetic get-a-life loser can piggyback onto someone who actually has some level of professional accountability and they can be comment No. 17 on Dan Le Batard's column. That, in most cases, grants a forum to somebody who has no particular insight or responsibility.

I've gone and pulled the seventeenth comment from each of Le Batard's last four columns on the Miami Herald website:

—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—

Did you just become aware of the fervor about your comments?

Yes, I've been on vacation, and just saw [Sunday]. I noted that many of the comments expressed disappointment. I wanted to clarify and amplify my points, not backtrack or apologize or anything.

All right. So did the Miami Herald story quote you correctly?

Yes, the quotes were accurate, but it didn't have everything I said. Barry Jackson [the reporter] is an good reporter, but that wasn't everything I said. He, and everyone who was at the [charity auction], knew that I wasn't condemning everyone.

So, feel free to clarify.

I don't have any problem at all with the mainstream media being challenged or supplemented by new media. No entity has a monopoly over good writing from a valid point of view. In that sense, the more the merrier. In fact, many bloggers, on numerous subjects, sports included, are talented, humorous and bring fresh perspectives.

My commentary was aimed solely at a portion of Internet sports discourse, an unfortunately large portion, that consists of nothing more than potshots, ad hominem arguments, ignorance and invective. No one who is familiar with the general tone of public discourse, whether it be sports, politics, whatever, can honestly deny that much. It comes from that direction.

I was absolutely not saying that most or all bloggers were losers. It just seems so often that commenters use insults in the place of arguments. Is there a lot out there that's also well-written? Or course. But forgive me for not placing the exact same value on an comment on a political blog that I would to something said by Ted Koppel. Sure, they have the equal value in a voting booth. But you have to assume that if you've done something reasonable well for an extended period of time, you have some notion of what you're talking about.

So you don't think anyone who writes a blog or comments online is a "get-a-life loser?"

Some have inferred that I have this elitist view, and that I think only people who have been somehow "certified" have the right to comment on sports. It shouldn't be confused with somehow being superior. If you opened up anything to large numbers of participants, you'd find some real gems in there. But you'd have a lot of muck to sift through. I do think newspapers' comment boards need to have the same sort of standard they'd have for a letter to an editor. It's possible they just don't have the manpower for that, though. I do think I made a good point [in the Herald story], but it's only part of what I think.

Do you read blogs?

I look at some baseball blogs, Baseball Prospectus and what-not. Sometimes I'll see something funny in The Onion, and I've recently been looking more at your site since your book came out. It's a generational thing, though. I would do well to download music, but that's just not something I do. It's not my natural first impulse. I still love to pick up a newspaper in the morning.

We think the tipoff for people being angry was the "basement" line. Everyone's a little tired of that line.

Yes, well, that might have lapsed a bit into cliche.

Yes, Bob Costas, a guy a lot of people have always kind of looked up to (figuratively, of course), thinks all of you are "pathetic, get-a-life losers."

"it's one thing if somebody just sets up a blog from their mother's basement in Albuquerque and they are who they are, and they're a pathetic get-a-life loser, but now that pathetic get-a-life loser can piggyback onto someone who actually has some level of professional accountability and they can be comment No. 17 on Dan Le Batard's column or Bernie Miklasz' column in St. Louis. That, in most cases, grants a forum to somebody who has no particular insight or responsibility. Most of it is a combination of ignorance or invective.''

"It's just a high-tech place for idiots to do what they used to do on bar stools or in school yards, if they were school yard bullies, or on men's room walls in gas stations. That doesn't mean that anyone with half a brain should respect it.''

Sigh. We really have to go through this again?

Hey, Bob: Those people, the ones you're calling "get-a-life losers?" THESE ARE YOUR VIEWERS. They are not this special mutant brand of human who has simply bubbled up from the nether since the Internet came around. They're people who, for years, have had no choice but to be talked to by you, with no voice of their own to respond. For years, you've had a free ride; you've had your platforms, and you've been able to spout invective about whatever tickled your fancy. This is your right; you've certainly earned it.

But — with all due respect, sir, from a fellow Cardinals fan and a longtime admirer — why are you the only one who gets to talk? Are you seriously claiming that the people who watch your shows, the people who invest their time and money into this the sports enterprise that has allowed you to thrive, the people who pay your salary ... are you really claiming that they're "get-a-life losers?" These are the people who have been watching you all along. It's one thing to want to elevate the nature of sports discourse; heck, we kind of want to do that too. (Kind of.) It's another thing to portray this divide as one between "People Who Are QUALIFIED To Talk About Sports" and "Internet Get-A-Life Losers." It's that kind of attitude that shows blatant contempt for your viewers — your customers, man! — and makes the outlet that is the Web that much more important.

We thought you were on the right side of this debate, Bob. We really did. We fear we might have been wrong.

Bummer: Bob Costas Hates Bloggers [The Big Lead]

(Photo via Can't Stop The Bleeding)

Our favorite little-known Costas anecdote: After the Bulls won their first NBA title, Costas went into the locker room to interview a euphoric Michael Jordan. Clutching the championship trophy, Jordan sat next to his wife, and both were crying. Costas looked at Jordan's wife and said, "Michael, I see your mother is here." Jordan, competitive as always, eyed him and pointed out, "that's my wife." We love that story. Poor Juanita.

Anyway, do you like the Bob Costas? Do you not like the Bob Costas? Let us know.

Gawker Media polls require Javascript; if you're viewing this in an RSS reader, click through to view in your Javascript-enabled web browser.

It's not even so much that we disagree with him; it's just that he's so sanctimonious about everything. And it's pretty funny how he always talks all tough to the media and then gets before Congress and is all, "Steroids? Wha? OK, maybe baseball has steroids. Maybe. Not sure. Could be!"

Anyway, he's hammering Barry Bonds and Mark McGwire again.

"If someone wrote that stuff [Game Of Shadows] about me and I didn't sue, am I not admitting that there's some legitimacy to it?" Schilling said on the "Costas Now" program. "It goes to the Mark McGwire thing in Congress. I mean, I'm a huge Mark McGwire fan. But I just always thought it was very simple: If you did something and someone asks you if you did it and you didn't do it, you say no. Any other answer than no is some form of yes, isn't it?"

You just have to admire how much tougher Schilling is on steroids when, you know, he's not under oath or, you know, sitting right next to one of the guys he's talking about. By the way, when Bonds was asked about Schilling's comments to Bob Costas, he said, "You mean that little midget man who absolutely knows jack ... about baseball, who never played the game before? You can tell Bob Costas what I called him." For the record, "midget" is considered an offensive term to describe little people. It is not, however, considered an offensive term to describe Bob Costas.

Schilling Takes On Bonds, McGwire [MLB.com]

Anyway, Olbermann's got another gig: He's gonna be on NBC's NFL pregame show this year.

Keith Olbermann will return to sports for the first time in six years to join Cris Collinsworth as co-host of the pregame show for NBC's Sunday night NFL telecasts. Olbermann, who currently hosts a prime-time newscast and opinion show called Countdown with Keith Olbermann on MSNBC, will join with host Bob Costas and analysts Jerome Bettis, Tiki Barber and Peter King on NBC's "Football Night in America."

OK, that highlight show is starting to become awfully crowded, and we anticipate many pissing contest between Costas and Olbermann as to who gets to play the role of "Moral Beacon Of The Sports World." We think Olbermann could probably take him; Costas would win the smug points, but Olbermann's at least a foot taller.

Olbermann To Join NBC Pregame Show [SI.com]

When ESPN's Tom Jackson shot down Michael Irvin's "Manning vs. Manning" commentary last week with the moderately offensive "Are you retarded?" question, a few were a little taken aback.

Yes, Jackson could've been more sensitive by calling Irvin "mentally challenged," or "a mongoloid" or, even better, attempted to make his comment more complimentary, like, by calling him the much more inspirational "fat-tongued hero."

But, retard it was. And aside from The Internets, it seems to have been overlooked greatly by much of mainstream media. Maybe it was glanced over because of Jackson's quick and seemingly sincere apology — or maybe it was understood that his insensitive remark was merely playful banter. Or maybe, just maybe, the shackles of political correctness have finally been removed from NFL analytical debates. For the sake of this week's column, let's assume that's the case.

So, I'm ironing my Chris Burke jersey, strapping on my safety helmet and setting odds on the next exchange of thoughtless insults we're bound to see this season in upcoming weeks.

Steady your drool cups, it's time to jump.

—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—--

Bob Costas insults Peter King: 8/1

Topic: Should Mike Shanahan bench Jake Plummer for Jay Cutler?

"I say, no, Bob, because remember that Plummer's the guy that led this team to the AFC championship last year. I say, if you bench Jake, you're pretty much sending a message to the team that you're folding up the tents on the season if you go to Cutler this early."







"Well, it's obvious, Peter, that your love for Jake Plummer is based solely on the fact that he's one of the only quarterbacks in the league that has yet to have sex with your daughter, Mary Beth."








"Excuse me..."












"You heard me. I clicked on her My Space page and now my finger has Chlamydia. Onto the AFC North..."

Mike Golic insults Mark Schlereth: 6/1

Topic: Fact or Fiction: Is Reggie Bush a lock for rookie of the year?

"Fact. Charley Casserly single-handedly set this franchise back about 10 years when he picked Mario Williams. Reggie Bush is the most explosive offensive player to come into the league since Barry Sanders and could very well be the guy that makes the Saints a perennial Super Bowl contender for years to come."

"Fiction, you misguided Mexican. Reggie Bush has played exactly four games in the NFL and already people are making him out to be Jesus Christ. You've got burritos for brains if you think Bush will even be the best running back to come out of this year's rookies, let alone the best overall."

"Hey, I was born in Alaska..."

"Well, then, I'll personally take your mother on a dogsled ride in my pants if Bush wins Rookie of the Year, okay, Nanuk? FICTION."

Shannon Sharpe Insults Dan Marino: 4/1

Topic: Chad Johnson's End Zone Celebrations

"Hey, I'm all for having fun out there. It's just this 'Me, me, me' stuff that gets a little tired. It undermines the other 10 guys out on the field who busted their butts to get you in that end zone."

"Come on, Dan?! You Italian, right? You telling me Italians don't get excited? Tell me you didn't get excited when you was little and your Moms would come out with that big, ol' bowl of spaghetti and salami and shit for Sunday dinner?

"I don't understand what that has to do with anyth...?"

"I'm. Just. Saying. That. Italian. People. Like. To. Dance. Too. I betchoo if I had a tray of cannolis in front of me right now you'd be doing motherfuckin' back flips."

Sean Salisbury Insults Merril Hoge: 1/5

Topic: Who will win the NFC North?

"I know things aren't going well now, but if you put Aaron Rodgers under center, this is a team that could easily run the table. Rodgers might be the best kept secret in football and under the tutelage of Favre, he could do lots of things — especially with a deep threat like Koren Robinson and the addition of Vernand Morency in the backfield, this is a potent offensive team. And if they don't do it this year, my money's on the 2007 Packers to go 16 and 0 on the way to victory in Super Bowl 42."

"Exactly how much lead paint was in your mother's tit when she breast fed you?"

(Shakes head. Laughs.)

"Every time you speak, I take this pen and stab myself in the thigh underneath the desk to stop myself from choking you."

(Shakes head. Laughs.)

"Honestly, I hope you get face cancer and eaten by a rabid cheetah."

Sports Illustrated will launch later this month "various video programs exclusively on SI.com," according to Terry Lefton in this week's SportsBusiness Journal. SI Managing Editor Terry McDonell said, "Our programming has to go deeper than just personalities. Our charge is to take the magazine experience and making it an every day/every hour thing on SI.com." Peter King will have an NFL-insider segment on "King's Corner;" Bob Costas and Jeff MacGregor will host "Jump The Q," which will "showcase the two in an informal setting discussing the sports issues of the day;" and Paul Zimmerman will be featured in "She Says, Z Says," where he will "offer his weekly NFL picks with SI swimsuit models who are avowed football fans." King and Costas will also star in a yet-untitled webcast on the "lighter side of sports."

First off, we can all agree that Bob Costas and Peter King just don't get enough camera time. But more to the point: Dr. Z and swimsuit models??!! Wha? We're not quite sure what to do with that. Probably cry a little.

The roster is impressive. The studio show, "Football Night In America," is packed, with Bob Costas, Cris Collinsworth, Sterling Sharpe and Jerome Bettis, who is from Detroit. The game crew is the same as last year: Madden and the wascally Al Michaels. Andrea Kramer is the sideline reporter, and if we know anything about this sports media world, we know that position will require her to endure upwards of four million "which athlete/coach/fellow broadcaster is she sleeping with?" rumors in the first two months. (Most of which started by bored print beat guys.)

All in all: A pretty good team, we think. Thoughts?

NBC Sunday Nights Is All Right For Football [Boston Globe]

(UPDATE: Oh, and Peter King's going to be on the show too.)

Anyway, we're gonna have a little contest here to win a free book. All you have to do is send us in your best athlete run-in stories. Whether you saw A.C. Green getting a lapdance, Scottie Pippen sprinting out of a restaurant to skip out on the check, Jose Canseco escorting an old lady across the street ... whatever. Think Gawker Stalker, except with athletes, hopefully doing something stupid. Anonymity, as always, is guaranteed. The best stories will be published on Deadspin and will win yourself a shiny new book.

So, send 'em in to tips@deadspin.com. The juicier the story, the better. Good luck, yo.

The Education Of A Coach [Amazon]

(A reader informs us that the correct term for someone who sits down to pee is a "sitzplinker." That's fantastic. We are now referring to Bob Costas exclusively as "Bob Sitzplinker.")

You can do a lot with $25,000. You can provide food for starving Africans before Sally Struthers eats them first. You can buy 1,518 copies of Bill Simmons new book (not counting shipping, which is probably a bitch). You can even join 2,500,000 of those record clubs where you get 11 CDs for a penny.

You can also hire ESPN anchor Stuart Scott to come speak at your corporate function. The site HireSportsSpeakers.com allows you to bring your favorite ESPN personalities to come talk to you and your fellow corporate drones about leadership, teamwork or, you know, just how to read off a Teleprompter. The site serves as a broker between corporations and sports personalities, negotiating their fees and putting together their schedules.

One would think that paying Stuart Scott $25,000 plus "travel is almost always on top of the fees, usually something like first class for two, ground transportation and hotel" to do anything other than promise never to use the terms "pillow," "cool," "boo" or "yah" again would be somewhat excessive. But Scott isn t even the most expensive anchor on his own network. In fact, he s not even close.

Full list of top ESPN anchors/sports personalities and their speakers fees after the jump. Start saving those pennies for Tom Tolbert now!

The appearance fees for major "sports personalities."

$15,000 and below
Mitch Gaylord - $10,000
Greg Gumbel - $15,000
Ron Jaworski - $10,000
Tony Kornheiser - $15,000
Tom Tolbert - $15,000

For a guy who has a sitcom based on his life — albeit a pretty unwatchable one — we think that's a pretty good price. Well, relatively speaking. By the way ... Mitch Gaylord! Still alive, we guess. Good for him.

$20,000-$30,000
James Brown - $30,000
Rich Eisen - $25,000
Roy Firestone - $22,000
Marion Jones - $20,000
Jim Nantz - $25,000
Dan Patrick - $30,000
Rick Reilly - $25,000
Stuart Scott — $25,000

We don't know how much Dan Patrick made for his Hair Care For Men ads, or, for that matter, how much Rick Reilly got for encouraging his readers to become drunken idiots, but it couldn't have been too far from this amount. By the way, Reilly's amount is probably around the starting salary for entry-level print journalists in this country, if you were wondering what that collective "pounding-head-against-desk" sound was.

$40,000-$50,000
Mitch Albom - $40,000
Chris Berman - $50,000
Jim Rome - $40,000

You know, we wonder if Mitch Albom actually has to be there giving the speech to collect his cash, or if he can just say he was there.

$50,000 and above
Bob Costas - $60,500
Al Michaels - $75,000

For an extra 10 grand, Bob Costas will promise not to lecture you about your lack of class and decorum. Don't worry, though; he brings his own stepstool for the podium.

Just For Fun
Leslie Nielsen - $70,000

Enrico! Pallazzo! Enrico! Pallazzo!

HireSportsSpeakers.com [Official Site]

Costas says he will host the show again sometime in the future, likely with the topic is beanie babies, or tapioca.

Costas Rejects BTK Episode Of "Larry King Live" [Reuters]

An appearance on "The Daily Show" is the worst venue for this, of course, because Costas thinks he has license to yak it up. We had an Ichiro Suzuki story that seemingly goes on forever, to no good conclusion. A Viagra joke about Rafael Palmeiro ("He gets good wood on the ball," making Stewart wince). After calling Barry Bonds "very odd" and saying in so many words that he took steroids, adding creepily "He has a beautiful smile." It should be on reruns today. Check it out. If you dare.

"The Daily Show With Jon Stewart" [Official Site]