Richard Deitsch of Sports Illustrated joins the show for a 15-round slobbernocker.

For each show, in this space, we give a description of the topics covered on the episode. Sometimes we write a recap of what we discussed -- or the questions we asked (and answered) -- and sometimes we try to give more, including pull quotes or a written extension of the conversation.

I’m not sure that’s possible today. Today’s interview, if you can even call it an interview (at one point I question who was interviewing whom), is one of the shows you really just have to listen to in order to understand that, while we jokingly hyped Deitsch’s long-awaited appearance on the show as the media-insider equivalent of a boxing match, it ended up being exactly that.

It’s hard to explain all of what was discussed in more than 75 minutes (total runtime 1:16:27) but it includes all things sports media, from web to print to TV to podcast guest lists.

Deitsch takes over the first seven minutes of the show to basically interview me. It’s a theme that continues throughout the show, which is hopefully keeps the listeners on their toes as much as it kept me on mine. There is an underlying -- often overt at times -- power struggle throughout the show, and while it’s done in good fun and tongue-in-cheek, it’s clearly there, and made the conversation much more entertaining to be a part of.

We discuss Deitsch’s sabbatical from SI.com for a fellowship at the University of Michigan where he studied twenty-somethings and their consumption of, you guessed it, new media. He talks about going to Argentina and Moscow (and meeting Gorbachev) and we discuss if there was a time where he thought there wouldn’t be a job for him when he returned to SI. And that’s not an indictment of SI, more a commentary on the current media landscape.

We talk about the difference between Sports Illustrated and SI.com and, to the company, which gets more focus. I also wonder why SI.com has been slow to the blog format. With Hot Clicks, all of Extra Mustard, Media Circus and even Monday Morning QB lending themselves more to segmented five-posts-a-day blogs and not one off columns, it’s interesting that SI still maintains the model they do.

I pose the question I asked Neil Best -- does Deitsch feel he’s a NARC? And is anyone off limits? He took a jab at Jemele Hill’s name-dropping Twitter in his column a few weeks ago, so I ask if he can take the same jab at Jon Heyman fawning over Alyssa Milano or Arash Markazi name-dropping athletes he’s ‘hanging out with’ and taking TwitPics of the pool at the Playboy mansion. This leads to a discussion about Bill Simmons and his inability to criticize people at ESPN on his podcast, and in print. Does Deitsch have the same constrictions at SI?

We talk about the importance of things being ‘off the record’ and later discuss comments from Fox’s Jay Glazer, in which he told Deitsch he only reports 2-3% of the information he has. Perhaps that’s just Glazer skewing the numbers, but it leads to the question of who he’s serving by holding so much back -- is he serving his friends in the business and the players he covers, or is he serving his employers, and in turn, the fans.

In Glazer’s case, his employers are happy because that 2-3% is the big stuff -- the Favre stuff. But it leads to a question of politics in media and the back-door deals and side information people give and get. It happens in every business, but when it’s the media’s job to report news, and Deitsch’s job to specifically report news on the media, how does he find the balance?

Along those lines, a few weeks ago we discussed being ‘first’ or being ‘right’, and how really none of it matters unless you’re friends with the people who can get your story out. If you are second on a story, but your report is linked on Deadspin and Hot Clicks and TBL and Yahoo, then the guy who got it first, well, really didn’t get it first. Is knowing the right people -- and getting your stuff in front of them -- more important at this point than being first to the story?

For those who listen to the show all the time, you actually learn quite a bit about the process by which we try to book guests. And we discuss how the names are placed on the site and who I’m afraid to reach out to and who is ducking us. I’m certain that in the 75 plus minutes we talked, only 30 minutes were me interviewing him. The rest, which is undoubtedly just as interesting, was so inside inside baseball we were back outside in line waiting to get inside again. The media-conversational equivalent of digging to China, I suppose.

We talk about Berman and Morgan and Buck and McCarver and even Greenberg. Do they feel more wrath from the sports media (and fans in the know) simply because they’ve reached that upper level, or have they gotten worse at their jobs since reaching that level? Do people not like Berman because they are tired of his act, or do they not like him because he gotten the notoriety he has with that act? And what about someone like Buck, or even Greenberg, whose only real crime is being in too many places at once and not being great at all of them. Buck is solid on a baseball broadcast, and if you think he’s not a good talk show host (he’s not) why does that impact your view of him as a broadcaster? Greenberg does exactly what ESPN asks him to do on Mike & Mike. Whether or not you think its good radio, he is good at what ESPN wants him to do. That said, he was a terrible game show host, so is it fair to hold one thing against the rest? People have been able to separate Kornheiser’s work on Monday Night Football with his work on PTI. Are others not afforded the same?

That, of course, leads to a discussion on the dynamic of how one person’s opinion matters more than everyone watching. ESPN has put people like Colin Cowherd and Skip Bayless (and for a while Stephen A. Smith) in more and more prominent roles, even knowing that people in the business, and oftentimes their core audience, rejects them. Why? As Kenny Mayne said, you only have to convince one person you’re good at something and if they put you on air, you have a job. Is that what it is for people like Morgan and Bayless and Cowherd?

And why are we still in a Mad Dog Radio mentality? Haven’t we gotten past the shock-jock attitude, especially with national sports coverage? Aren’t we smarter than that as a sports culture?

We vacillate between boxing analogies and running a marathon and at some point I erroneously invoke the name of Golda Meir when trying to think of some former athlete who’s name I cannot remember and will take with me to the grave. Was I thinking of former gymnast Olga Korbut? Was I thinking of Rosie Ruiz (I think I was thinking of Rosie Ruiz)? Still, to pull Meir out of the air...well, it’s been a long show.

We end on a question about Deitsch’s Media Power Rankings. WTF? Can a podcaster get some love? I do think the organizers of Blogs With Balls should have made June’s list, but at this point, a guy has to look out for himself, right? As I’ve said, I’ll take ARV.

Thank you for spending the time with us. No show tomorrow, but I think this is more than enough to tide you over until Monday.