Traditional sports ranking of community strength:

Teams > Players > League

but esports/socialmedia/fantasy/tradingcard-boom/tech-unbundles-everything has shifted things

Players > Teams > League

Players are realizing it. Teams will be wise to adapt fast.

We're doing our best at @weareangelcity to build a world class pro sports club with the new reality in mind.
e.g., For a century, there was tremendous brand + community value in 'putting on the pinstripes' of the NY Yankees bc a player was imbued with the community + brand love from being associated with the club... just like a journalist getting a job with the NY Times...
But now, fans -- the community -- have a direct relationship with the individuals (the players/journalists) who are doing the real work every day. That is a huge power shift... and it's a very good thing for those men + women.
Very different industries, obviously, but Substack-ification of media in 2020 was a preview for a lot of other sectors. Going to be interesting to watch in sports, bc it's the most meritocratic industry, yet still very problematic history between owners + players.
e.g., In 5 years, a club as famous as the Yankees will be running the numbers before signing someone not JUST to decide if he'll help the team ON the field, but if his personal community will drive merch sales, ticket sales, views, etc OFF the field.
e.g., Why is a @Giannis_An34 rookie card worth $1.8M (slightly more than @KingJames' Lakers magic) ? BC the sports community believes he will + they're investing in his present greatness + future potential. The Milwaukee Bucks Brand ain't driving that.
e.g., @MarcusRashford is out here basically feeding all the kids of Britain in *addition* to being a super-talented young footballer, but it's his community that's a "stock" I'm buying all day long.
If either one of those two young men goes somewhere else (I know Giannis just signed a 4yr deal) -- their base is still cheering for them, maybe even more bc they're getting exposed to new markets...

More from Sport

You May Also Like

A brief analysis and comparison of the CSS for Twitter's PWA vs Twitter's legacy desktop website. The difference is dramatic and I'll touch on some reasons why.

Legacy site *downloads* ~630 KB CSS per theme and writing direction.

6,769 rules
9,252 selectors
16.7k declarations
3,370 unique declarations
44 media queries
36 unique colors
50 unique background colors
46 unique font sizes
39 unique z-indices

https://t.co/qyl4Bt1i5x


PWA *incrementally generates* ~30 KB CSS that handles all themes and writing directions.

735 rules
740 selectors
757 declarations
730 unique declarations
0 media queries
11 unique colors
32 unique background colors
15 unique font sizes
7 unique z-indices

https://t.co/w7oNG5KUkJ


The legacy site's CSS is what happens when hundreds of people directly write CSS over many years. Specificity wars, redundancy, a house of cards that can't be fixed. The result is extremely inefficient and error-prone styling that punishes users and developers.

The PWA's CSS is generated on-demand by a JS framework that manages styles and outputs "atomic CSS". The framework can enforce strict constraints and perform optimisations, which is why the CSS is so much smaller and safer. Style conflicts and unbounded CSS growth are avoided.