Last night, Jimmy Kimmel unveiled the 2014 Sports Illustrated: Swim cover, and the result is eye-popping. Three gorgeous ladies — Nina Agdal, Lily Aldridge, and Chrissy Teigen — reveal a great deal for your viewing pleasure. I know someone out there is going to complain about us blurring the booties, but we have to do that for our advertisers. To be perfectly fair, this cover will also be censored on newstands by a convenient black band upon a plastic cover. Hey, I used to work in a bookstore. I know what happens if these issues aren’t kept under wraps. You naughty people. Anyway, the uncensored cover is viewable here. I find it somewhat amusing that Chrissy always tweets about having no ass, and well, there it is. Right there.
This is shaping up to be an interesting issue, and I’m looking forward to seeing all of the photos when SI does the full website reveal. Chrissy’s been with SI for years, Lily is gorgeous, and Nina’s career is very much on the rise. (Nina’s also rumored to be Leonardo DiCaprio’s latest model and just announced her breakup with Max George.) Lest you think Kate Upton was shunned for a third consecutive cover, the issue features a spread of her astronaut-themed rack in zero gravity.
As I understand it, SI doesn’t even tell the models too far ahead of time that they’ve made the cover. Right? We all get to be surprised together. Chrissy and Lily both spoke with People about their reactions. They seem to genuinely dig each other:
What was your first reaction when you heard you were on the cover?
Chrissy: I started crying. But it was a weird shaking, trembling because … I didn’t believe it. Maybe because it’s airing on Kimmel and he likes to prank people. I was like, ‘This is the meanest prank of all time.’
Lily: I was so excited when I got the call to do Sports Illustrated, and then …. I was shooting in the Cook Islands with these incredible girls. I felt so lucky that I got the best shoot … it was the perfect introduction to Sports Illustrated. And then to get the cover! It’s so crazy and such an honor.Are you excited about sharing the cover? Does it make it more special?
Chrissy: It does feel extra special. I’m just really excited to get to run around with them for the next month or whatever. People say that and don’t mean it but I really love them … We’re literally tied together forever because of this. I hope you know that.
Lily: You’re stuck with me.Who did you call first and how did they react?
Lily: We both called our husbands.
Chrissy: Before I left, John [Legend] said,’‘Don’t trick me. Don’t say, Babe, I didn’t get it and [then say] I got it! Just be happy and just say it!’ So I just called him, and through tears, [said] ‘I got it.’ And that was it.
Lily: My husband [rocker Caleb Followill] is very proud. He’s very excited. I don’t think there is a man in the world that wouldn’t be super-stoked their wife ends up as the Sports Illustrated cover model.
[From People]
The issue hits newsstands next week, and it will not arrive without controversy. I guess Mattel decided SI was a great place to promote Barbie (?), so they bought a cover for her with a full-on advertorial. The campaign is called “#Unapologetic” because Barbie is tired of everyone “body shaming” her entirely unrealistic body proportions. This is supposedly a “cheeky nod” to Barbie’s critics, but I think it’s freaking rude to women in general. Body shaming is not funny, and SI usually promotes healthier body images than those found elsewhere in the media. People are not happy about Barbie’s cover, and I agree. Barbie might be “a legend in her own right,” but she’s a hunk of plastic. Unattainable. And I hate that she’s being treated as aspirational here.
Photos courtesy of Sports Illustrated: Swim & Mattel
Is it just me, or do they all look somewhat similar?
They have a sameness that is kind of boring. The Barbie cover is better.
Definitely, especially Nina Agdal and Chrissy Tiegan who both have very similar small upturned noses. They’re both extremely cute, accessible looking women, which is probably their appeal in this type of spread. I always thought the same about Kathy Ireland: she was very cute but not a great beauty by any means.
They look very similar, and none of them are wearing a swimsuit for the swimsuit issue.
Uh… Photoshop similar!!
what is lily aldridge doing working with si? she’s a vs girl, and she barely makes the cut in vs. she’s very average looking.
i know si loves chrissy, so i’ll give that one a pass.. but i miss when si actually had stunners, like cintia dicker.
“what is lily aldridge doing working with si? she’s a vs girl, and she barely makes the cut in vs”.
SI sometimes uses VS models to be in their mags. Tyra Banks comes to mind. She made the cover twice.
I love the Barbie cover. She isn’t body shaming because she’s just a doll. I grew up playing with Barbies and all it did was make me want a sports car and a cool house.
The body issues I have came from my mother’s hatred of her own size, and also by comparing myself to MODELS and actresses in movies – not dolls.
Jag I agree.My insecurities came from bullying and teasing and looking at unattainable beauty growing up and not Barbie doll’s.I played with them also.And the cover is underwhelming.I actually like the Barbie one better.
I’m the same. Playing with Barbie were happy times for me. I have body issues and they are not as a result of Barbie, but my life and the people in it.
My parents were crap at being parents but great at gifts. I had a lot of stuff, the horse, the pool, the spa, the car (which never worked), a stage (but that may have been Jem?). The horse was my favorite, I wanted one just like it.
I LOVED Jem & the Holygrams!!!
I wanted to do my makeup like Jem (and I was not wearing makeup at that age)
(BIG HUG)
I never saw Barbie as anything but a toy with cool stuff. I wanted her car and clothes. Never thought about her body since she isn’t real. It’s magazines with their real models looking perfect that have me a complex.
Me too! I had the dream house, car, Skipper, Ken everything. I had a whole box of her accessories.
Barbie gave me white-itis and materialWeath-itis. The airbrushed anorexics from Seventeen and Vogue magazine sealed the body image issues. In my late forties I’ve finally realized it’s normal&ok to be broke, blemished and mixed race.
Jag, same here. I had tons and tons of Barbies but my body issues came from peer pressure, bullies, and other forms of media well after I was done playing with Barbie.
@Jag, agree. Barbie never gave me any body issues, I found that as you did from actresses and models. Barbie just gave me hours of fun as a child playing. Had the pink Corvette, the clothes and my most favorite was the camper. That was one of the best Christmas gifts I ever received as a child! Second to Barbie were my Dawn dolls, and my Chrissy and Velvet dolls. Gosh, I’m really dating myself here!
All your replies are awesome!Barbie was my escape.I am 50 and when my goddaughter got on the floor and started playing with them I did too.Barbie has nothing to do with body image.At least not for me.I collect them and treasure all of my memories as a little girl.
Nope she doesn’t have a butt but she is arching her back so much it might snap. And the Barbie cover?..I can’t!!!
They’re all arching so terribly it gives me back pain!. This cover doesn’t even try to act like it’s about swimwuits even faintly. They’re obviously going for the male fantasy here more than past issues imo.
I’m a girl so I know that this image isn’t aimed at me, but I don’t think it’s great. They’re arching their backs so far to make it look like they actually have booties that it makes them look weird.
LOL- I love Barbie- nothing she does offends me.
Me too! I’ve got a huge collection and i sometimes play with some of my Barbies too. I’m transitioning into ‘Collector’ now though 🙂
I just do not find Chrissy that special. She is a nice looking woman but to me she is certainly not “hot” “sexy” or “beautiful”. I never understood the fascination with her.
Now Emily R is a cover girl I can get behind. I may have bought the issue if she was on the cover, just out of respect to her. Now Ill wait to “read” it at my next dentist appointment.
Not that I am comparing the two but didnt Heidi Klum do SI while an VS Angel?
I like Lily, I think she has a very pretty face and that she’s quite versatile as a model, from what I have seen. And I think she does look a bit angelic. Sort of. (Simon Baker is the most angelic person I’ve seen so far, his face is totally an Angel face!!!) I know I am in a minority, I know there are people who say she not the VS type. But I think she has a nice body, she looks toned and healthy, nothing OTT. I think she is a good VS angel. On the other hand, Cara Delavigne (I am not sure I got her surname right ) and Karlie Kloss, I think they are definitely not VS material. And to be honest, I don’t know how come Alessandra Ambrosio is a VS model.
Maybe Nina and Chrissy look good in person, tall and such. I find them bland (their faces).
even after two kids, alessandra has one of the BEST vs bodies working right now. she knows how to keep herself in shape, better than most of the vs girls who don’t have kids.
Can’t believe they chose a cover/models so underwhelming for a 50th ANNIVERSARY ISSUE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I actually find Chrissy Teigan to be a little strange looking. And I feel kinda bad for saying it but it’s true.
Granted, most people aren’t focused on their eyes, but my biggest complaint about the cover photo is that are Nina and Lily looking at the camera, but Chrissy’s eye’s are looking off to the side. Couldn’t they have at least gotten a shot where they were all looking in the same direction?
uh, is it just me or does the pose look absolutely ridiculous? i mean, i get that they are trying to enhance their rear view but they all look like they are about to bust into an apocalyptic fart.
???
is it just me?
I agree. It’s just too try hard. Maybe they could have found models with more ample backsides if this was the look they were trying for?
There aren’t many si models with such backsides. The only one that comes to mind is Ariel Meredith.
Ok, ok, I know how I’m going to sound here, but it bugs the hell out of me that the swimsuit issue barely has swimsuits in it anymore. The girls are usually topless, in extremely small bottoms, or naked with body paint. Why don’t they just call it “The Playboy Issue of SI” and leave it at that?
Also, I’m so tired of the asses-first pose. All it makes me think of is a National Geographic special where the female is “presenting” herself to the male. Blech.
I posted my comment before I saw yours. I agree. It’s all nothing but pandering. But almost every single magazine does this.
Wish I read both of yours before I posted the same thing as well!
90s models from the supers to the 2nd and third tier ones – think Susan Holmes, Meghan Douglas, Chystelle, Claudia Mason, Shana Zadrick, etc. – blow these girls out of the water; but at least they chose models – didn’t SI have beyonce on one of their covers awhile back?
Emily Didonato, any of the Asian beauties and Barbara Palvin would have been better choices.
Emily Didonatio looks like a frightened rabbit. Barbara is beautiful, I agree. She looks like Natalia Vodianova.
She annoys me too. And Lily is the worst angel VS ever had, she looks so over it when she walks, and she isn’t even pretty. I’ve never heard of this Nina person.
I seem to be alone here, but I think they’re all quite pretty.
You’re right, of course: they’re all pretty girls. I don’t think they’re great beauties, but they (at least Chrissy and Nina) definitely have that girl next door look, and that’s appealing to a lot of guys.
Is it just me, or does it bother anyone else that Nina and Lily are looking directly at the camera and Chrissy is looking in a different direction?
Anyone? Anyone?
Yes, that bugs me too. I thought the very same thing when I looked at the cover. With that said, I kind of like Chrissy. She has sass and isn’t a bland model type (also, she’s from my hometown, so that is why I might like her too)!
Swimsuit edition. right. Why have they not just called this the NAKED GIRLS EDITION EVEN THOUGH WE’RE SUPPOSED TO BE A SPORTS MAGAZINE a long time ago and be done with it?
I actually think this is SI’s best cover in years and that all three women look beautiful.
And this has what to do with sports?
Not a thing. I believe it started as a way to make men, poor babies that they are, happy since it’s the time of year where football is over and baseball hasn’t yet begun.
GG
I’m with you. And I have a SI subscription. Have for years. It’s a good read for sports. The Swimsuit edition is more of a soft core wet t-shirt issue IMO has virtually no sport articles worth note. It’s a throw away.
Yeah I agree with Penelope this is STUNNING omg it’s ridiculous they are gorgeous the light is beautiful and the smiles are mega watt. I love it and can not believe all the shade, snark and hate being thrown around these comments. Get real.
Stopped paying attention to models a long time ago. They have become mostly interchangeable and lacking in any discernible personality. There are some exceptions, but to be honest, I have no idea who any of these particular girls are. They are very pretty, but put them next to Cindy, Naomi, Christy, Linda or Claudia (even today) or SI legend Elle McPhereson, and they would blend into the scenery. Where’s the charisma? The only one, IMO, who could possibly hold her own with them is Kate Upton.
And I love Barbie. Her body never bothered me, she’s fake and made of plastic. As a young girl, i thought it was weird looking. However, I did covet her wardrobe! And maybe the plane, dream house, town house, camper, corvette, hot tub, swimming pool with water slide….
I agree! I miss the real “supermodels” of long ago. They were unique and just had that “it” quality. Not very many nowadays stand out like they did. Maybe Gisele and Alessandra and that’s about it..
The 90’s model’s were the best.
I loved Barbie. What I loved the most about her was her independence – remember the coloring books? She had JOBS – like, real career-type jobs. She was a pilot! (Yes, she was also a flight attendant, if I remember correctly, and in the 80’s, we called her ‘stewardess Barbie’). She was a doctor! She was a big sister! She was a teacher! She was an advertising executive, with a big house and lots of stuff. I wanted to have my OWN life, like Barbie, not her hip size.
I don’t get the fascination with nearly naked thin women. There is nothing to look at. Maybe modeling clothes on the runway it works better to have a slimmer body, but for swimsuits? I don’t think so. I see three bony women with no butts, so not attractive. I have two slim teen daughters and they are shapely, with butts and boobs. Slim does not have to mean shapeless. And say what you will about her, but at least Upton has has some thickness. Yeah, many say she has no butt, but at least she doesn’t have negative butt like Chrissy. And by the way, I wouldn’t mind seeing an issue that celebrates all body types. Wouldn’t that be novel?
i agree, especially to be a sports magazine they could have gotten more fit and toned looking women with more backside, these girls are bony which works in some arenas but sexy to men? I don’t know, most guys I know, like curves and shapes and meat and flat tummys.
For the record, not once have I ever looked at Barbie as an ideal anything. In fact I didn’t understand, even as a kid, how she could have a house in Malibu, a pink Corvette and no apparent job. They didn’t sell the special edition ones at Toys R Us.
That said, I like the Barbie cover better.
Maybe I’m used to the Kim K/ JLo butts now, but these women all look very scrawny. I liked the models of my era, Cindy Crawford, etc.
Years ago I’d like at these covers and feel bad about myself. Now that I know that everything is enhanced via software [and years and years before, other alternatives], I feel good and couldn’t give a rat’s ass about these models.
My back hurts just looking at them all “booty tooching” so hard. You can even tell a couple of them are standing tip-toe in the water to try and show off their nearly non-existent backsides. I’m not saying they’re not beautiful women, but why didn’t SI pick models with more junk in the trunk for a booty cover?
I’m sitting here nursing my baby girl and this cover just makes me sad for her. What’s the message? Stick out your butt and take off your shirt (sideboob!!) I agree with whoever said it looks like a mating pose. Ugh. I can’t with this.
What’s wrong with sticking out your butt and taking off your shirt if that’s what you wanna do? They’re not performing sexual acts on the cover or anything.
Um I don’t know I’d like to see young women celebrated for something they’ve done or achieved rather than for how they look with string wedged in their butts. That’s just me, though.
I gotta say – I guess it was a rhetorical question, but my husband would NOT be super stoked about me posing half-naked (two-thirds naked?) on the cover of a magazine!
Ok, I just asked him, and apparently he wouldn’t mind. Who woulda thunk!
They’re certainly not ugly. But after I scrolled down I couldn’t remember what their faces looked like. Nice bodies though.
Chrissy may not have a butt. She’s arching her back and of course photoshop helps.
I don’t get all the fuss with Barbie.
They look healthy. I’m just thankful for that.
Though these girls aren’t stunning like many past models and more interchangable with looks these days it’s not the face many are looking at.
I think the models are pretty and have nice butts. But sexy? No.
I can’t be the only one who doesn’t find this cover to be actually sexy? You know, the kind of sexy that models used to have that even straight women like me found to be a turn on? Rebecca Romijn and Heidi Klum and Tyra Banks had it: http://si.com/vault/swimsuit/modelfeatured/rebecca_romijn/1999/model/3/13/index.htm
It’s like sexy right now is being defined by guys like Robin Thicke who just want women to be chunks of meat paraded around. It’s totally gross to me bc it feels like a new plastic ’50s kind of thing.
Most men would want to have a wife that has a “Sports Illustrated” figure but would they want their wife to be posing topless in such a magazine? I don’t think so.
I’m not really impressed by the cover and its models, but…………… I’m a girl and most of those hungry men will think otherwise.
That chick Chrissy, kinda annoys me. I saw her on The View talk show some time ago and she came off as contrived. I only know her to be “John Legend’s wife.” Other than that, I don’t know much about her.
I don’t understand how Lily is a VS model. She’s pretty but no stunner, but then again, most of the VS models today are bland and clones of each other. Only VERY FEW stand out.
The models in the 90’s were more beautiful, curvier and sexier than most of these chicks modelling today.
At first glance it looks like some spring break ad for a cheap motel in Pismo Beach.
God almighty the best SI model was Rachel Hunter back in the late 80’s and early 90’s. Elle McPhearson was called the body. Hulllooo, more like Rachel. Well Rachel and Racquel Welsh. I do have to say Rebecca Romijn did indeed have a sick body. Her face looked like a cross between Doutzen and Rachel.
Barbie was a doll. I loved playing with her and dressing her up. Really happy memories. All this BS about her body being unrealistic is such total crap.
What makes me feel bad about myself is magazine covers like this. I starved myself down to a size 4 (at one point I even fit into size 2 jeans) then gained 50 lbs. back and feel ashamed. Ironically I’m married to a man who seriously thanks I’m a gorgeous goddess. When I criticize myself, he says “I wish you could see yourself the way I see you.” I wish I could, too.
The pose looks very awkward. The hands touching the butts look fake. The backs are all curved and look very uncomfortable. The smiles are fake. There are no bathing suits.
This is obviously about the butts. Three butts. One side boob. High porn count.
I hope this mag is not in the front of the checkout aisle at the grocery store.
What really annoys me is Chrissy’s thong is too big. Kind of cheesy. And this makes her look like her forehead is miles high.
This cover is yet another example of Chrissy Teigen’s hypocrisy. That’s all I will say.