Rick Reilly used to be one of my favorite sports writers when I was a child. Key word being, child. Seriously, back in the day Reilly used to do featured articles on the very back page of Sports Illustrated — and to my knowledge, they were good, accurate and insightful pieces. Maybe it was youth, naivety or some form of misguided enthusiasm, but I though he was all kinds of swell.
However, it has been many years since I thought he was anything more than a ESPN lackey. Today, Reilly now does a half-ass job with everything. He is a well-known self-plagiarist, a guy who frequently misquotes sources so the story fits his narrative and an all-around pretentious dickface.
That’s what brings us to the latest Reilly fiasco. As in, the Rickster wanted to do a “Washington’s team nickname isn’t so bad because I found a person of Native American background and he said so” article. Granted, the title wasn’t that long, but the entire god damn premise of the piece was Reilly tracking down his father-in-law (who is of Native American decent) and having him tell us touchy liberals that we are being a bunch of scallywags.
First, it should really be noted that Reilly’s column was already a hot pile of steaming shit-sense. His entire premise of the article was that he found a guy from said background and that guy wasn’t offended — so everyone else shouldn’t be. Because, you know, one dude trumps all.
Second, Reilly’s father-in-law was misquoted. Misquoted to the point, mind you, that he told Reilly he wanted that article fixed. Reilly did not oblige, so the father of the daughter that Reilly (reportedly) bangs had to go to the media to explain it himself. Basically, Rick’s father-in-law was not happy how he was quoted and that it did not truly represent him or his beliefs — basically taking an ax and ripping Reilly’s entire article to shreds and ruining whatever credibility it might of actually had (to be fair, though, very little credibility was there to start with).
Don’t worry, either. Reilly responded to the reports to his shitty journalism via Twitter, naturally:
While I stand by the reporting in my Sept. 18 column about the Washington Redskins nickname controversy, and felt I accurately quoted my father-in-law in the piece, clearly he feels differently. This is an incredibly sensitive issue, and Bob felt he had more to say on the subject after that column was posted on ESPN.com. We’ve spoken and cleared this up. I admire Bob and respect his opinions, and he’s welcome to express them. Bob and I are good and I’m looking forward to my next steak with him.
He stands by his column? His column was based off his father’s quotes. That would be like you having a person murdered, claiming self-defense because you claimed he was threatening to eat your brains, only for us to find out that the person threatening you was 140000 miles away at the time of the apparent threatening and had not teeth. You just wanted that asshole dead and made up a story to make yourself sleep better at night.
Reilly, essentially made up a story.
Powered by Sidelines