Comedian Tim Dillon slams Sydney Sweeney critics upset with steamy ad: 'How insane is that? '

Comedian Tim Dillon defends Sydney Sweeney’s “Novig” ad amid athlete backlash

A sports‑prediction‑market firm, Novig, recently released a promotional campaign featuring actress Sydney Sweeney in a series of shots that left a handful of professional athletes and commentators upset. The ad, which shows Sweeney posed in a mostly nude tableau with sports gear as partial cover, sparked a debate that has spread to podcasts, news outlets and social‑media platforms. Comedian Tim Dillon, known for his blunt commentary on his daily podcast, joined the discussion, arguing that the campaign does not hyper‑sexualize women and that the backlash is misplaced.

Who and what

• Sydney Sweeney – Actress best known for roles in Euphoria and The Handmaid’s Tale. She appears in a Novig advertisement that shows her in a near‑nude pose, with strategically placed equipment (football, basketball, etc.) covering parts of her body.
• Novig – A sports‑prediction‑market company that paid Sweeney to promote its platform.
• Tim Dillon – Comedian and podcaster who discussed the ad on his show, criticizing the reaction it received.
• Felicity Palmateer – Australian surfer who, in a CNN interview, called the ad “very damaging” and “hyper‑sexualized.”
• Ariarne Titmus – Australian Olympic gold‑medalist swimmer who publicly denounced the ad.
• Amy Hunt – British sprinter who joined the criticism.
• Gracie Kramer – Former U.S. gymnast who also opposed the campaign.
• Craig Carton – Radio host who defended Sweeney on his program, dismissing the criticism as “crazy.”

When and where

The campaign was unveiled in early August 2024. The ad ran on a range of digital platforms, including sports‑related sites and the Novig website. The backlash began shortly thereafter, with athletes posting statements on social media and appearing in interviews. Dillon’s comments appeared later that month on his podcast, and Carton’s defense aired in the same timeframe.

Why the controversy

Critics argue that the ad’s depiction of a nearly naked actress, even with sporting items as minimal cover, reduces female athletes to objects of sexual interest. They say it could set a harmful precedent for how women are represented in sports marketing, especially for younger female athletes. Dillon counters that Sweeney’s presence is meant to highlight the product’s target audience—athletes—rather than to sexualize them. He further claims that the criticism is overblown and that the actress’s “hotness” is simply part of her market appeal.

Key statements

• Tim Dillon:
  “It’s nice to look at. What are these female athletes upset about? What is Sydney Sweeney going to do? You want her to gain weight and be some fat rugby player? She’s taking her t‑s out and you should be happy about it.”
  “No one is valuing female athletes for what they look like. Female athletes are great and we love them and we respect them and they’re important, but no one thinks because Sydney Sweeney, a hot actress, put her t‑s with a football, that everyone is sexualizing female athletes now.”
  “Sydney Sweeney’s hot is part of her appeal. She’s also a very good actress, but she’s hot. That’s part of why they do an ad with her and they know it gets controversy.”

• Felicity Palmateer (CNN interview):
  “The campaign is very damaging, especially for young females getting into sport, for females in sport, for females in general—just hyper‑sexualized content.”

• Sydney Sweeney (social‑media response):
  She posted a series of ESPN magazine covers featuring nude athletes—including Serena Williams, Ronda Rousey, Sue Bird, Megan Rapinoe and Caroline Wozniacki—to contextualize the debate around the portrayal of female bodies in sports.

• Craig Carton:
  “The world’s going crazy when it comes to the photographs of Sydney Sweeney… ‘Oh, we’re sexualizing women. It’s not right. It’s setting the women’s movement back 100 years.’ No, you’re just ugly. That’s what that is.”
  He added: “Consider for a moment that the non‑crazy side loves those pictures of Sydney Sweeney. The crazy side would rather support… Lindsay Clancy.” (Carton also referenced a separate controversy involving the former U.S. congresswoman, though that story was unrelated to the Novig ad.)

The broader context

Novig is one of several companies that have recently turned to celebrity endorsements to boost visibility. The company’s campaign strategy has included previous controversial ads featuring actresses in provocative poses, such as a Guess “good jeans” spot that stirred public debate in 2015. Dillon predicts that, following the current uproar, other firms may look to replicate the strategy, hoping that the combination of a well-known actress and a “hot” aesthetic will generate buzz—whether positive or negative.

The debate has also highlighted a divide within the sports community. While some athletes view the ad as an example of the objectification that persists in sports marketing, others—particularly those who support Sweeney—argue that the ad simply showcases an actress who happens to be attractive and that it should not be conflated with the treatment of professional female athletes.

Conclusion

The Novig advertisement featuring Sydney Sweeney has become a flashpoint in the ongoing conversation about how women—especially athletes—are represented in media. While critics accuse the campaign of hyper‑sexualization, supporters like Tim Dillon and Craig Carton defend it as a legitimate marketing tactic that does not undermine athletes’ value or agency. As the discussion continues, the sports‑media industry may need to re‑examine its advertising practices and how they intersect with broader conversations about gender, representation and consumer culture.