After the competition began two months ago, thousands of entrants were whittled down to 16 finalists who were judged on weekly assignments, and in the end Brandon Vogel defeated Brian Moore (MooreSports) to claim the crown.
Voting for final week 1. HiPlainsDrifter -- Avg rating this week: 4.10 2. MooreSports -- 3.16
Brandon now joins the winner of NGSI, Ty Hildenbrandt, in becoming a contributing writer to FOXSports.com.
Here are the pieces that HiPlainsDrifter wrote throughout the final rounds that helped win him the competition:
Congratulations to both Brandon and Brian, and all 16 finalists, for making it as far as they did, and thanks to everyone who entered and voted throughout the competition.
And it appears very likely that this competition will continue in the future, so please stay tuned.
With only a few hours left before the big announcement, here are the judges' comments on HiPlainsDrifter and MooreSports' final assignments:
Assignment No. 1
HiPlainsDrifter Peter: One of the first heavily personalized pieces you've written, and you pull it off with flying colors. It's the little things that make your writing such a delight to read. When you toss in a simple reference to the "tie-dyed Nets", hardcore NBA fans can't help but acknowledge you are one of us. We know those light, kinda-sorta columbia blue Nets uni's from the early '90s, envision Benoit Benjamin wearing one, and know the exact Jordan move from "Come Fly With Me" that you are referring to. Your choice of art worked pleasantly as well. It offers that 1990-1993 feel, puts you right in the place of Michael Jordan's career where Dwyane Wade is now, and is loaded with memories of a bygone era. All in all, this is a fabulously entertaining read, loaded with nostalgia, insight, and statistics. You pose an argument, back it up beautifully, and keep the reader entertained. This may be your best submission yet.
Dime: You took a topic that has been beaten to death in your first assignment (Flash = MJ) and put a solid spin on it that made it a much better read than most of the pieces penned around the country over the past few weeks. The Dime Crew worships at the altar of "Come Fly With Me" and to a man, pretty much all plan to have the eventual sit-down with our sons to introduce them to Mike and the greatest DVD ever created. For so many of us out there who have come up this era, there will never be another Jordan. But there is a Dwyane Wade. There is a LeBron James. And there will be more who will carve out their own unique legacy. The faster we get past looking for the next Mike and start to truly appreciate who we have today the better off we'll be. Nice work.
Tom: Writing heavily personal pieces is a very tough line to walk, and when I first started reading this I feared it was heading toward crossing the line. But you backed away from the personal stuff at the right time and offered good evidence and comparisons. I wasn't as enthralled by this piece as Peter and Dime, but still thought it was a very, very solid effort.
MooreSports Peter: I like the angle. Not enough pieces were written on Riley after these Finals. But there's got to be more analysis on the Van Gundy stuff. You mention it briefly, but don't discuss why you think the move was made. Remember, from what we know, Van Gundy stepped down to spend more time with his family. In this piece, you just say Riley decided to replace him. There's something that went on there that is very intriguing. That might have put this well-written post over the edge. I liked the White Chocolate/Starbucks decaf latte line as well. However, this puppy drags. This piece could have ended here: "In making them believe, he convinced an eclectic group of players with varying backgrounds and ages in a cynical league of selfish athletes to come together for the ultimate goal -- a championship." Instead, it goes on for a few more paragraphs. Knowing when to wrap a piece up is key, especially in Internet writing. All in all, this is a good article, just not sure this jumps off the screen.
Dime: We think that Riley was the most challenging subject of the bunch, so to come up with a solid, well-written piece that thankfully never once mentions Riley's hair, scores points with us. We feel that his was one of the best pieces you have submitted during this entire contest. It would have been pretty close to perfect if not for the played out "one kidney" Alonzo reference. Overall though, it was very good.
Tom: Riley was an interesting angle to take, especially given the other choices might have been more dynamic options. I think you gloss over the fact that this was an All-Star team of sorts with about six guys that had at one point been No. 1 scoring options on various teams. But you did hint at this at points and talk about how Riley got players like Antoine Walker and Gary Payton to shift roles, but I think it would have been a better piece if it delved into this angle a little more. Overall a decent piece though.
Assignment No. 2
HiPlainsDrifter Peter: Not sure I love this as your wild-card subject, but you still managed to entertain and inform. The intro is a tad on the repetitive side. In three separate paragraphs, you mentioned your summer was based on the U.S. Soccer team and the Cubs. This could have been done in one. Yet, the piece rapidly improves. Mets line is hilarious. The "AIG" commercial line was pretty good too. As opposed to forcing these quips, like so many of your competitors have done, you sneak them in craftily, adding to the overall comfort of the piece. The look for the future is a promising and humorous one. This entry is the perfect size too -- not too long, not too short. Well done.
Dime: Your second entry was also solid. Almost all of us know what it's like to suffer with our baseball team (one of us is tortured on a daily basis by the misery of living and dying with the Phillies) and there isn't a sports fan out there, soccer zealot or not, who wasn't disappointed by Team USA's showing in the World Cup. This entry, like your first, had a deeply personal touch, which is always cool. And we loved the prediction for 2026.
Tom: Again, was worried about the overly personal tone, but it didn't cross the line, and there were some great, great lines in here. The AIG line, the wonders of capitalism and farm-raised turkeys lines were all some of the best of the entire competition and they were all in one piece. This was definitely my favorite of all four of the pieces this week.
MooreSports Peter: You could go with any topic and you did a "Why sports are great" piece? I feel like Simon Cowell, shocked at an "Idol" contestant’s putrid choice of song. From the first paragraph, I read this, and think -- "Hmm ... a married Red Sox fan, talking about pop culture, and a bloody sock." Another writer on a pretty major site has made quite a career out of that, written a best-selling book on his personal connection with the Sox and sports, and is probably the most read guy in the world of Internet prose. So, why would I want to read this? How many die-hard Red Sox fan/I live and die with the Sox stuff have we read already? "Fever Pitch" was quite enough. I know your connection to the Sox isn't what this article is about -- but from the intro, one might think it is. As for the piece itself, it's a fine enough read -- safe, close to the cuff, even cute. But it's not exactly polished. It drags a bit too. You seem to recognize that, yourself, inserting the term "I digress" in a final-round assignment. Overall, this is a pleasant enough read. But I'm not rushing to read this on a Monday morning when I first get into work.
Dime: We cringed at the start of your second assignment. "More about the Red Sox???" "What sports means to us as a society???" Been there, done that about a million times by a million different writers. Thankfully, your entry wasn't all about the Sox. It was still a decent piece (the paragraph about teaching your 4-year-old to taunt Yankees fans instead of learning to read made us laugh out loud), but for the final assignment in the final round in this contest, you needed to come with a haymaker. Unfortunately, this just wasn't it.
Tom: I fear I totally agree with Peter and Dime on this one. This was by far my least favorite entry in the final round. Although the Red Sox stuff at the beginning didn't quite chafe me like it did the other judges, the intro read way too much like a "What I did on my summer vacation" essay. It was very preachy at points (the line about rising gas prices and alternative energy sources was so out of place in this piece that it made me shudder). And lines like "If you're reading this" and "But I digress" were painful. Addressing your audience like that is a very dangerous tactic. It tends to feel like we as readers are sitting in an audience watching you lecture us from a podium; not exactly enjoyable. And unfortunately, most of this piece felt like that.
Voting has closed for the final week, and just a reminder that we will be announcing the Next Great Sportswriter winner Wednesday at approximately 3 p.m. ET.
Judges' comments on the final assignments will be posted Tuesday.
(Note: Sorry for the delay on comments. They will be posted later today)
Thanks to everyone who voted, and congratulations again to HiPlainsDrifer and MooreSports for making it this far.
There are two assignments to start for HiPlains and MooreSports this week, with a third one depending on whether the NBA Finals reaches seven games.
If the Mavericks win Tuesday night's Game 6 to force a Game 7, check back here Wednesday morning for the third assignment.
But for now, on with the two assignments already in place:
Assignment No. 1
Pick one of the following six subjects and write a piece specifically on them. These are people who have been written about extensively over the last two weeks, so the key will be to find a new, original angle that someone will still be interested in reading after hearing so much about them already.
The six subjects to choose from:
Dirk Nowitzki Avery Johnson Mark Cuban Dwyane Wade Shaquille O'Neal Pat Riley
Now this assignment isn't due until Friday at noon ET, so there is plenty of time and plenty of possible ways to go with this. But one thing to keep in mind is that should the NBA Finals end Tuesday night, it might be tough to post a compelling read on one of these figures on Friday, three days after the Finals are over. This isn't to say it can't be done, it's just something to keep in mind. Also keep in mind, that if there is a Game 7, the deadline for that piece will likely be at a comparable time (meaning Thursday/Friday). I'm not telling you how to juggle your time or what angles to take, just something to keep in mind.
And you really can take this piece in any direction you want, but the piece must center on one of the six figures listed above.
Assignment No. 2
This one is a carbon copy from the final round of NGSI.
The topic is completely your choice. This one is probably the one I'll be looking at most closely because I'll be working with the winner on his 20 pieces for the site, and I tend to give a lot of freedom to what writers think are their strengths. And I want to see what's the best work the finalists can come up with when they are given complete freedom.
It can be any topic, any sport, any format, but has to be about sports and not something ridiculous akin to "Here's why I should win." I want the writers to think of it as something that really showcases the best possible work they can produce.
This one is due Saturday by 6 p.m. ET.
Congratulations on making it this far, and good luck.
Here are the comments for last week's deadline assignment on either Game 3 or Game 4 of the NBA Finals. The voting was very close, but overall the scores weren't as high as they have been in past weeks.
HiPlainsDrifter Peter: Well-researched and written in your distinct voice. I liked the "90 Cent" nickname. But "Dallas still trailed 42-46 and the Heat" seems off. All in all, not your best work. But still strong. Dime: Incorrectly hyphenating "six minutes" in the first three words is no way to start a piece. Other than that though, it's a solid post. We appreciate the stance - missed foul shots by NBA players make us nuts. Tom: This was not one of my favorites this week. It's just not a compelling read. It starts well with a good lead and a good transition into the heart of the piece, but fades very quickly after that. The "trailed 42-46" is a bad mistake. This isn't tennis, and putting the lower score first in any sports article will just trip up anyone reading it and cost the author a lot of credibility. Also saying "145 seconds" in the ninth paragraph seems a little random. Sure "nearly two and a half minutes" might be a little longer, but I think saying "145 seconds" is a lot more likely to trip up the reader.
MooreSports Peter: Really good angle. The line about Walker being like the " lazy friend with bad pick-up lines get a job, a haircut ..." wasn’t bad, just not sure it works within the tone of this column. Article flows from start to finish, though, and might very well be your best effort of the competition. But the Dunkin' Donuts line wasn’t funny and made no sense; jokes like that are not necessary in these types of pieces. Dime: A solid, well-written post. It's not spectacular, but in a week when no one seems to really be on top of their game, "solid" is decent. Tom: This was also not one of my favorites this week, as it just seems to be a kind of a ####-hum game recap that didn't really have a very original take. Talking about the momentum in a series is OK, but it's hardly original and the piece didn't take an angle that really made it very compelling. But I also liked the line about Antoine Walker.
nappytemple Peter: Fun angle with the Justice League stuff. Pretty nicely written and well researched. Would have loved if you parlayed this postgame report into a bit of a preview for Game 4. Also, I think the Hasselhoff stuff has been done quite a bit by now, and in this article, there was no reason to mention it where you did. Reads like a forced "hip" reference. Dime: We dig the Justice League, so we appreciate the angle and the creativity. But please, please, PLEASE no more about Hasselhoff. Tom: This was a pretty decent read, and I liked the Gary Payton "Glove/mitten" line and the stat about Dallas' record when Howard goes for more than 20. But a couple little things struck me like the Kobe reference is the first paragraph seemed unnecessary and following the good line about "Glove/mitten" with something as painfully cliched as "But when crunch time rolls around, ice water still flows in the veins of the Heat's 37-year-old point guard" made me cringe.
joshhoskins55 Peter: Great angle. Haslem’s been one of the under-the-radar grit guys in the NBA his entire career. But it seems like you really forced the issue with the jokes and wisecracks here. The article was good enough on its own without that. Estefan joke was a major dud, and just didn’t fit. The Jim Abbott line? Eh. If you’re going to make that joke, which doesn’t work in a serious postgame analysis, I would have gone with the drummer from Def Leppard instead. Dime: We like the topic -- Udonis is definitely one of the most important players in this series -- but the execution just isn't that nice. A lot of the humor feels forced and some lines just don't feel like Josh's usual work (Gloria Estefan, Jim Abbott, "the greasy-haired Riley"). He has set the bar really, really high over the past few weeks with great post after great post, so when one entry doesn't bring the heat, it's glaring. But even D-Wade doesn't always have his best stuff. Tom: This was actually my favorite piece from this round; a round when unfortunately I found almost all of the pieces pretty mediocre. This was a good example of finding what you deemed an underappreciated gem and calling it out and really using the details to support your argument. The Jim Abbott line is pretty touchy (especially since "Abbott" was misspelled) and if you're going to go that route when you know you're probably going to offend some people, you better make sure it's a great line that even those of us with somewhat twisted senses of humor will appreciate. I'm not sure this one was one of those lines.
Sorry to nappytemple and joshhoskins55, and congratulations to our final two: HiPlains and MooreSports.
Comments for the Week 4 assignments will come later today, as will at least one of this week's assignments for our final two. As we are now in the final pairing, this week there will be at least two assignments for HiPlains and MooreSports, and possibly a third.
And while the voting will still end Monday, the winner won't be announced until Wednesday so that we can trumpet the announcement a little more.
Here's the fourth assignment/topic for our finalists, and the one with the tightest deadline to date:
Game 3 or Game 4 of the NBA Finals
Basically the finalists can choose which game they want to write about, but they must choose one game specifically and the deadline will be decided by which one they choose.
If they choose Tuesday night's Game 3, the piece must be posted on their blog no later than 9 p.m. ET/6 p.m. PT Wednesday night.
If they choose Thursday night's Game 4, the piece must be posted on their blog no later than 9 p.m. ET/6 p.m. PT Friday night.
This format is meant to allow the writers a little flexibility while also testing their ability to write a timely piece in what amounts to basically a 24-hour deadline.
What to write about? Again, it's relatively open-ended, but it must be about specifically what happens in one of those two games.
Here are the comments for the last assignment on the NBA Finals, and as you can see in some of the comments, there was a little disagreement among the judges this time.
And as the field shrinks, there is less difference between the highs and the lows as well.
Received highest scores from judges
HiPlainsDrifter Peter: Wow! Brilliant. The writing, which as always was fabulous, paired with the incredible concept, and the awesome photos (Love the Cage character in "Adaptation") -- made for quite an enjoyable reading experience. HiPlains -- you took this competition to the next level this week. Dime: Good stuff; very creative. A nice break from all of the other Finals breakdown pieces that are all over the web. Tom: Very original and very enjoyable. HiPlains has yet to disappoint in any assignment.
joshhoskins55 Peter: Pretty clever. Was dragging a bit until I got up to the acronym signs, and then I lost it. Hilarious. Way to incorporate the immortal Yasmine Bleeth. I also thought the Kareem to Kareem line was quick, witty, and exemplified that you know the team front and back. I liked your other two posts a little more, but this one still was head and shoulders above most of the competition. Dime: Just awesome. Got my highest score this week. Tom: I thought this one was just average; decidedly a step down from his previous two assignments. Misspelled both the first and last name of Gheorghe Muresan. The signs were very creative though.
MooreSports Peter: Would have been an interesting angle had you stuck with the Nielsen Ratings stuff and broke down the highest rated/lowest rated, and reasons why. Instead, you went from the interesting start to a standard NBA Finals preview that you can read anywhere. The writing doesn't dazzle, but it's also not hard on the eyes. All in all, "eh". Dime: Solid piece. Well-written and not too long. I liked the contextual links and the reference to one of the all-time great smack-talking moments in NBA history with Scottie Pippen's classic "The Mailman doesn't deliver on Sundays." Tom: Great lines in this one ("We are all Nowitnesses" for example). A nice improvement from last week's entry.
Received lowest scores from judges
Dudski Peter: I really like this! Instead of offering your own long-winded preview, you took a humorous tone and attacked the mainstream media's stale, even primitive, style of analysis. This was really good. The writing was tight, it didn't drag on, and you carried a voice throughout. You took a stab at something new, and you struck gold. Dime: Repeatedly misspelling Dirk Nowitzki's name at this point in the contest is totally inexcusable. Tom: I agree about misspelling Nowitzki. He's just too high-profile and we're too deep in the contest to botch this so many times. (Jennifer Aniston also misspelled for what it's worth.) I also thought the intro was a little long-winded, and the piece seems to take a lot of time basically blasting unfounded predictions and then the author offers up his own at the end. If this was meant to be ironic, it was lost on me.
Gbrent Peter: Standard NBA Finals preview. The World Cup thing at the end was an interesting angle to this year's Finals that no one's really written about. I wish THAT was the focus of your article. Dime: A little long, with a few grammatical errors, but otherwise it was good. Tom: This just read like one cliche after another. Spent a lot of words basically saying nothing.
DrMidnight Peter: This writing looks rushed. In the same sentence you, said "to their credit" and "to his credit". With a simple read-through of this, you could have avoided such repetition. The focus -- this marked a new era of international flavor -- was good in concept. I just wished you posed that from the start of this article instead of the wholly unnecessary three-paragraph intro. The thoughts are there -- but the organization, structure, and writing isn't. Dime: Definitely average. It was a little all over the place. If there was more focus to the piece and the writing was tightened up a bit, it could have been much stronger. Tom: There are times that this does read like a first draft of a story; something that has plagued the author throughout the competition. The transitions are seriously lacking as well, from the intro to the list of old "Next Great Eras" to out of that list and into the current scenario. Interesting paragraph comparing the influx of global talent to the influx of black players decades ago, but I'm not sure this is backed up enough; this could have been an interesting piece by itself. Dwyane Wade misspelled too. But only writer to use a Sade reference this round; not sure if that's a good or bad thing.
Other comments
nappytemple Peter: Solid article. Really strong. If any criticism -- maybe a little long. An interesting part of this would have been analyzing Johnson and Riley as players as well. Dime: Solid post, if unspectacular. It was a little long, but it works. Tom: Quite good. Agree that the most relevant critique is that it's a little long.
tjw118 Peter: You went with the TV angle and did more research, and ran with it. Good work. Lots of research in here, and the analysis works well. When you put good data together with good writing, the reader really feels like he/she is digging into an expert's work. Dime: Good post. You can tell that tjw took a ton of time researching and you come away having learned something after reading the post. Tom: Gets bogged down in the numbers a bit much. Also don't misspell "Nielsen" ratings in a story all about TV ratings. Also don't quite understand the invitation format at the beginning.
Sorry to those who got eliminated, and congratulations to everyone who advanced to next week.
Comments for all the Week 3 assignments will come later today, as will this week's assignment for the remaining four finalists which will feature the tighest deadline for our writers to date.
Here's the third assignment/topic for our finalists:
The NBA Finals
Now this doesn't specifically have to be about this year's Heat-Mavericks matchup or any aspect of this series, but it certainly can be. Next week, there will most likely be an assignment dealing specifically with this finals matchup.
Pieces must be posted on finalists' own blog no later than noon ET/9 a.m. PT this Friday.
As we near the announcement of who will advance to Week 3, here are the judges' comments on some of the work done in Week 2.
Received highest scores from judges
HiPlainsDrifter Peter: Well-researched, light-hearted, and thoroughly enjoyable. I specifically enjoyed the internal war against making the lame Bruce Dickinson "Cowbell" jokes. Very original topic. Great job. Dime: When I opened his "Best/Worst" entry and saw the Disco Demolition Night pic I was disappointed because I thought it was going to be the same old predictable thing. It ended up being really creative and entertaining. Tom: Very enjoyable read. Strong from start to finish.
joshhoskins55 Peter: Again, a unique look at something many might not know much about. Passion for the A's, good writing, and solid research all made this a terrific piece to read. "All the ambiance of a proctologist's office" is a phenomenal line. Dime: Really good. This entry not as good as the last one, but still strong. Tom: I agree that this wasn't as good as his Week 1 effort, but still a solid read. I felt it got a little grandiose at points ("second base apex"), including the lead which struck me as a little "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times ..." And while photos are certainly not required or even part of our judging process, the use of the before/after photos in this piece was a great service to the reader.
nappytemple Peter: Seems like an episode of "Around the Horn" in article form -- a little too jokey for me. But that's fine. You tried something new, and a less critical reader would probably enjoy this thoroughly. I commend you on the risk-taking. Dime: Good stuff this week, but not great. Tom: This was an odd piece, but I really enjoyed it. Loved the lines about Shaq's blue sweater and the Bilas line about Adam Morrison.
Received lowest scores from judges
MooreSports Peter: An ode to the three-point shot? Not sure I loved the topic here -- and the entire Back to The Future theme seemed like a forced pop culture reference. Was this supposed to be a funny, light-hearted article or a hard-nosed, fact-based one? I still don't know. Dime: This piece was reaching with the Back to the Future thing, forcing creativity. And the piece was a little all over the place. Tom: The Back to the Future thing seemed really forced, especially considering the movie is about 20 years old at this point. And then an NBA piece focusing a lot on David Stern and Bird/Magic/Jordan? Not very original.
ShooterB Peter: Intro could have been tightened a bit (Why not go Horry, who also has 6 rings?), and this goes on and on. However, I like the use of the sidebar, and the research is there. Dime: No new ground was covered here and I don't feel like much creativity went into this one. The piece could have been more interesting if Shooter injected a little more personality into it, but as it is, it is not a very interesting read. Tom: This starts off well, but deteriorates as it goes and has a very odd ending.
tjw118 Peter: I dreaded reading this topic, thinking I'd seen all these on cheesy SportsCenter montages throughout the year. But you went with some random events -- the Japan Cup and the NY Marathon -- which made it a bit different. Even still, this reads like a summary of events, not an opinion. Your other posts this week were all a LOT more entertaining. Dime: I like some of the selections (NY Marathon), but in general I feel like this piece just missed the mark. Tom: Seems like a random timeframe to choose and somewhat lazy. Why not just talk about the unheralded best finishes like Japan Cup and NY Marathon and make that the entire focus instead of just choosing a random "of the past few months." Couple things also just struck me as being off in the piece: saying Leinart scored the game-winning "goal" instead of just calling it a touchdown, Belmont was misspelled, calling the Rose Bowl Vince Young's coming out party (I'd argue that he was already "out" and that this was simply him stepping onto the biggest stage) and then not mentioning that the Suns and Nash ultimately beat Kobe and the Lakers in that series.
Other comments
DrMidnight Dime: I enjoyed the D'Antoni entry, but this piece was a little too long and could have used some cutting down. Couple misspellings and typos too. Tom: A decent read, but is a little too long and talking about the column in the column just makes me cringe, for example this line: "That and his rather colorful-sounding interviews could have made Avery the subject of this column."
Dudski Peter: What's Charlie Weis the best at, exactly? Is he the best leader of young men? The best patriotic coach for a Top 25 team? Nice story and all, but what was this? Surely not a response to the topic at hand. Tom: A little too fawning, but not bad.
Gbrent Dime: I liked his piece on Andrew Morbitzer much more than the piece on Worst Sports Fan Behavior. The latter was too easy of a topic and it wasn't very creative. Just way too easy and obvious to write about Philly fans. Tom: Didn't quite understand how this was a "lighthearted" look as the headline states, but then gets all high-handed at the end about the "travesty" of it all. Really liked the headline for the Lakers entry though "Only in Cali, where we riot, not rally" (and yes, I know what it's from.)
edhardiman Peter: Lame analogy to start it off. Really lame. Pretty much the anti-grabber. But you really rebound. And the research adds to the piece. I laughed out loud at the Juan Lebron stuff. Tom: I liked this piece, with some very good lines about how "Rome wasn't burnt in a day" and the "meat-and-potatoes fundamentals". The LeBron wordplay was clever too. Didn't like the lead though because I just don't think it's true. I haven't gotten the impression that the media has been slobbering over Bonds at all lately, in fact maybe the opposite and knocking him at every turn.
Elizabeth_Bennet Peter: Read like a high school graduation speech. Felt like someone was preaching to me. About what? I'm not sure. Tom: Takes a big swing at this topic and not sure she connects. A little too high-fallutin' at points.
rivjo Peter: Fun piece. Not the best written -- as there are grammatical errors all over -- but very fun. What was Gastineau the best at? I'm not sure exactly. But you picked an angle and ran with it. Pretty good effort. Drags a bit, but enjoyable. Dime: I love the choice of writing about Mark Gastineau for the assignment. Totally not expecting that at all ... which is great. But unfortunately the writing does live up to the topic choice.
Here's the second assignment/topic for our finalists:
The best of ... or The worst of ...
Again, this is intentionally vague and open-ended. But you can take your pick of wanting to write about something that you deem "the best" of something or "the worst" of something. What's "something?" Totally up to the authors: game, play, team, event ... you name it.
Topic choice is often as important as the writing itself, so giving authors the freedom to choose their own path and seeing where they take it, is one of the ways we will be, and have been, evaluating entries.
Pieces must be posted on finalists' own blog no later than noon ET/9 a.m. PT this Friday.
As we near the announcement of who will advance to Week 2, we wanted to take a moment to comment on some of the work done in Week 1.
Received highest scores from judges
joshhoskins55 Peter: Enjoyable, random, informative. Something different. Fabulous. Tom: Very enjoyable read. Story could have easily devolved into something just about him growing up, but that part stayed in the background enough and served as a strong theme to keep the story moving. Some great turns of a phrase in here too ("the band geek of baseball" for example)
HiPlainsDrifter Peter: As always, a pleasant read. Take on Barrett is unique, well thought out and timely. Really enjoyed it. Tom: Timely topic, good lead and some more great phrases ("sophists of the sucker punch")
nappytemple Peter: Loved it from start to finish. Informative, too. Tom: An enjoyable read. Very similar to a recent ESPN The Magazine piece. Would have liked to know why Larry Johnson does the diamond celebration mentioned at the end.
Received lowest scores from judges
xea76 Peter: On a technical level, this is not the best written piece. A little too sentimental. Tom: Reads too much like a fan fawning over his hero. And turns into something that's more about the writer than the athlete.
tombradyquinn Peter: This was an SI cover story two years ago, and there's nothing new here. Not sure the three-paragraph intro was the way to go either. Tom: Spends the whole piece talking about how Sanders left for the love of the game, and then at then end says "As for the reasons (why athletes leave in their prime), such decisions are personal, and should remain personal unless disclosed by the individual who harbors them." Seems to be contradicting the whole piece on some level. Also makes a lot of wide, sweeping statements without much there to back it up. And then phrases like "Today, I will comment on ..." just make the piece read like a book report.
ShooterB Peter: I'm not sure this piece flows very well. And the summary of Ward's pro basketball career is a bit light. Tom: Good subject choice, but not much of a follow-through. Like the idea that Ward's time came too soon, but would have liked to hear more about why that was.
Other comments
absolutebest Tom: Got kind of blah in a hurry. Far from as good, and as thought-provoking, as absolutebest's other work. The X-Men piece on his blog now is a much better piece even.
DrMidnight Peter: Love the analysis. More than just a Shaq fluff piece, with good insight. But a number of glaring errors, probably due to pushing the deadline so much. Number of missing words and a glaring "Insert stats" comment in the middle of a paragraph.
Dudski Tom: Liked going off the beaten path a little, but didn't understand why I should really care about this guy beyond his connection to the author. For better or worse, there are literally hundreds of stories like this about small-town legends and didn't understand what made this guy special. More personal anecdotes about interaction with Moore or things he did might have helped a lot.
edhardiman Tom: The format of this piece made for a pretty frustrating read. Might have worked better for a narrative. Also didn't really understand the "Philly" aspect of this. Certainly there are tons of great ways to mine the Philly sports phenomenon, just didn't understand how it applied in this case.
Elizabeth_Bennet Tom: Not sure you defend some of these points, but overall an interesting read.
GBrent Peter: A lot of insight and research, but is about 1,000 words too long. Takes a whole paragraph to say something that you could say in one sentence.
JWatters Tom: A good read, with some good analysis. But also could benefit greatly from some tightening up.
MooreSports Peter: Another Bonds piece? Haven't we heard enough? That said, this is a pretty decent angle and the writing style is unique. Just not sure it was an exciting read.
Rivjo Tom: Kudos on the topic choice and a decent read, but would have liked it more if it went beyond a little of the small-town-boy-makes-it-big cliche.
tjw118 Peter: Really dug this and liked that you chose a person so close to your heart. A little fluffy and corny at times, but still pretty good.
Peter Schrager Peter Schrager is a regular contributor to FOXSports.com and author of the popular "Wednesday Buffet" in the FOX Funhouse. He was also one of the judges in the first Next Great Sportswriter competition.
Tom Seeley Tom Seeley is the managing editor of FOXSports.com and was also a judge in the first Next Great Sportswriter competition.
Dime Magazine Dime Magazine is a complete celebration of the game of basketball and its culture, from the playground asphalt to the NBA hardwood to life off the court.
