Eh...Simmons will basically be able to pick his next job. He's one of ESPN's most prominent and popular writers.
Well.. we'll see about that. I think Simmons would probably rather not work for another corporation in the same way that he did ESPN. And in that I hope to see him turn this situation around to his benefit.
I'm sure owning Grantland was never an option that was on the table when he pitched the idea to ESPN.
I doubt that.
It was his original idea, his concept, and his writing and skill that propelled the vehicle forward. To say it was never an option, I think, would speak volumes about his relationship with ESPN; and if this were truly the case, again, he got bad advice.
He would have been better off creating Grantland on his own and letting it grow out organically until he could encourage investments and advertising relationships in order to cover the costs of content and driving traffic.
To give you an idea of the model I'm referring to, there is a guy I used to blog with all the time on DailyKos, Nate Silver, who went from blogging there to blogging on his own site FiveThirtyEight. Back then, we were among a group almost entirely focused on poll analysis, and went back and forth projecting precincts in various elections.
Eventually his site was bought by the New York Times (IIRC), and he became an "employee," but he still retains a 40% stake in 538, and even if he were removed, he'd still get revenues from the operation. Now his site is very similar in design to Grantland, and covers politics, sports, and a host of other things with various NYT and 538 columnists on deck.
This model predates Grantland, and this is why I stated Simmons got bad advice.
He could've started the blog without ESPN, and worked out a cooperative arrangement with ESPN rather than them simply owning the IP rights, which again, was idiotic.
He benefited from their financial backing and they benefited from the group of writers he assembled and the ability of those writers to push the envelope more than they would have on ESPN's main site.
He benefited in some ways yes, with respect to exposure, but I don't think the degree of benefit was mutual.
ESPN apparently retained full ownership rights over Grantland, which is astounding. Simmons created multiple projects for ESPN that were very well received and ESPN profited millions due to his work. In exchange, Simmons was suspended numerous times, and subsequently and unceremoniously fired several months prior to his contract expiring.
This was not a mutually beneficial arrangement. It was an employee/employer relationship, which, again, is unusual for someone who creates as much content and drives as much traffic as Simmons; who is by and large, ESPN's top attraction, AFAIK.
Again, though, Simmons is going to be able to choose where he lands. Yahoo, CBS, and Fox will be leaping at the chance to sign him and any talent he poaches from Grantland.
No doubt, but at what point does Simmons want to control his own situation, rather than working for these corporations as nothing more than a glorified employee?
