Jump to content

ESPN: Topics Too Big for Just One Show (Thread)


  • Please log in to reply

133 replies to this topic

#91

ForgetYall

ForgetYall

    Video Archivist

Posted Jun 22, 2011 @ 6:33 PM

The ESPN book is really good stuff. There was a lot hard work involved but so much of their success was lucky, flukey, and now they're just this behemoth. Like how they decided to show the NFL Draft because they needed hours to fill back in 1980, and now it's this three-day, made for TV event.

If you are just going to read one section at the bookstore (shhh, I won't tell) or if you're in a rush, besides the first part on the beginnings of ESPN, I would go with "2009 and beyond" part. You would think because it involves so many people still employed by ESPN that everyone would play nice and not want to name names and air their grievances so publicly, but it's really just the opposite. The Kornheiser on MNF discussion was really interesting especially with the entire backstory on the "You're with me, leather" story. I would pay to see those two locked in a boardroom for an hour!
  • 0

#92

mrc12671

mrc12671

    Channel Surfer

Posted Jun 24, 2011 @ 10:07 AM

For those who still aren't sure about the ESPN book, I found an article that describes 10 highlights throughout the tome. Interesting the role their America's Cup coverage paved the way for bigger sports contracts.

http://thisorthat.co...m-the-espn-book
  • 0

#93

HickoryColt

HickoryColt

    Stalker

Posted Jun 24, 2011 @ 11:06 PM

I don't want to overstate things, but it is truly a remarkable and one of a kind book. To have first hand retellings, from those in charge over the last 30 yers, of the origins and development of one of the most successful, and one of the first successful, worldwide cable outlets is an original idea that the authors successfully execute to perfection. At times it can be frustrating because its not always a linear story from point A to B. They jump around quite a bit. However, its worth it to have the first hand accounts from those who were there at the time and from many different points of view.

I know of know no other book that details in such a frank and in depth manner the detailed origins of such a large, worldwide company from so many different perspectives and with such a "no holds barred" manner of storytelling from those interviewed. There is no downplaying or softening of opinions, stories or events in the least bit, even when it makes the company, or the employees, look bad in restrospect, which it quite often does. The retelling of the sexual harassment episodes in the 1980s sounds quite literally like the movie Anchorman.

Edited by HickoryColt, Jun 24, 2011 @ 11:06 PM.

  • 0

#94

Dr Smith

Dr Smith

    Couch Potato

Posted Jul 12, 2011 @ 2:14 PM

ESPN and women's sports...the mystery continues...

Who’s Afraid Of Hope Solo’s Nipple?
  • 0

#95

VictoriousNY

VictoriousNY

    Video Archivist

Posted Sep 20, 2011 @ 10:15 AM

I am very tired of this Tim Tebow thing, he doesnt have the best QB tech, not the best arm, he's a running QB and that how far I want the critiques to go. but to turn this into a philosophical debate over christianity and in sports is going overboard, I am growing tired of Skip Bayless having a daily meltdown over defending Tebow and calling out other ESPN guys, over or watching OTL and having segments on Tebow's faith. As someone who's agnostic, I dont have a problem with his faith, but I feel that the disccussion have become more about that than his actual playing skills.
  • 0

#96

Doom

Doom

    Stalker

Posted Jan 19, 2012 @ 12:53 PM

Stan Verrett did a highlight on Sportscenter overnight and the athlete's name was Eric and Stan said "Eric?! They invited Eric? I thought Eric creeped them out?!"

Not the first time he's used it, but it's just hilarious because I have a friend who can't stand that commercial, and even when the commercial isn't airing, it pops up on SC. Awesome.
  • 0

#97

JohnnyFever

JohnnyFever

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Feb 2, 2012 @ 1:40 PM

I see NBC and CBS are finally going all in with cable sports networks but is it too late? ESPN/ABC is so big now they can outbid the others on anything they really want. It's hard to believe it took CBS and NBC so long to get in on such a profitable business.
  • 0

#98

BDArizona

BDArizona

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 4, 2012 @ 6:43 PM

NBC will have to combine their "sports networks" and get more carriers for it to matter. Right now, they have the rebranded Versus/NBC Sports. That essentially is their NHL channel, so I have very little interest in it most of the year. There's some college football during that season, but little else. That one gets decent carriage. They shunt the Olympic sports to Universal Sports, which has atrocious carriage. Until they get rid of Universal Sports and put all of their cable sports on the rebranded Versus, they can't possibly compete with ESPN/ABC. They just have a poor business model.

I have watched CBS College Sports, but only rarely. I don't think CBS has enough in the way of contracts to have a sports-only channel. They have some college contracts, which makes CBS College Sports feasible. I still watch very little of it, because they're focused primarily on the SEC, and I just couldn't care less. Their only other contact is the NFL, and there's no way they're shunting any of that coverage off to cable.

I think ESPN is safe. These challenges will go the way of CNN/SI and Fox Sports' attempts to have a truly national presence.

Edited by BDArizona, Feb 4, 2012 @ 6:44 PM.

  • 0

#99

bluflu

bluflu

    Channel Surfer

Posted Feb 5, 2012 @ 11:20 AM

Right now, they have the rebranded Versus/NBC Sports. That essentially is their NHL channel, so I have very little interest in it most of the year

The NBC Sports channel has had quite a bit of NFL talk since the switch from Versus, probably because of their Sunday Night Football connection. They can't outbid espn for actual sports but I could see them competing with sports talk shows like espn's Sportsnation, PTI, Around the Horn, Jim Rome show, etc.
  • 0

#100

BDArizona

BDArizona

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 10, 2012 @ 6:57 PM

I decided to check out a NBC Sports studio show to compare to ESPN's offerings, so I watched NBC Sports Talk today. It's pretty good. I like it in that it's not as over-the-top and loud as ESPN studio shows. Still, I don't think they're doing anything here that's going to threaten ESPN. It's not different from SportsCenter in any fundamental way. It's same-old, same-old. SportsCenter is so entrenched, I don't see people tuning into this instead. As much as ESPN viewers claim they don't want the loud, catch-phrase-dependent sensationalism of ESPN, they still tune into one studio show after another that depends on that formula.

While I might watch NBC Sports Talk instead of SportsCenter, I don't see a large number of people doing so. I just think ESPN has too much of a head start. People aren't going to change the channel to watch NBC Sports Talk after watching the game on ESPN. It just isn't doing anything different. They're just going to stay there and watch SportsCenter, whatever faults it might have. ESPN already offers studio shows for the NFL, MLB, the NBA, college football, college basketball, etc. They also offer most of the actual games. Not having any really popular league contracts will keep this channel from presenting any kind of danger to ESPN.

Edited by BDArizona, Feb 10, 2012 @ 6:58 PM.

  • 0

#101

corvus13

corvus13

    Stalker

Posted Aug 20, 2012 @ 5:26 PM

Good GOD, can the announcers on the Little League World Series game between California and New Jersey just STFU about the New Jersey kid's dead grandfather? Yes, it's sad. And it was still sad the first twenty times they talked about it, interviewed his mother, talked about the other kids drawing the grandfather's initials in the dirt, etc., etc., etc. We get it. Move the f*** on.
  • 0

#102

jtenny123

jtenny123

    Couch Potato

Posted Aug 23, 2012 @ 12:16 AM

What will it take for ESPN to fire Skip Bayless? He gets away with race-baiting and throwing around drug accusations without any evidence and that's just in a week. What an absolutely pathetic network to have this lowlife on the channel.
  • 0

#103

Audra

Audra

    Fanatic

Posted Aug 25, 2012 @ 3:06 PM

I can't stand him either. I'm sick of almost every topic somehow having to include some type of praise for Tim Tebow. I'm glad Derek Jeter at least called him out earlier this week.
  • 0

#104

BigDfromLA

BigDfromLA

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Aug 26, 2012 @ 12:05 AM

I think Mike Tirico is absolutely horrible as an announcer, yet the network treats the guy like he is some sort of superstar play by play guy. What ESPN President does Tirico possess compromising pictures of? There are ten thousand announcers and college students studying broadcasting who are miles better than this guy. He was also portrayed as an arrogant weasel in the book. No surprise.

Skip "Leatherface" Bayless is just a hack. His only job is to be a prick and say things to upset people. Everyone should ignore the guy and he will eventually go away.

I like Stephen Smith. At least he is intelligent.
  • 0

#105

xaxat

xaxat

    Fanatic

Posted Sep 20, 2012 @ 9:32 AM

Last night ESPN was showing cricket results on the crawl. I know it's a really popular sport in all of the countries of the old British Empire, but I'm having a hard time seeing how it rates that space.
  • 0

#106

Doom

Doom

    Stalker

Posted Dec 18, 2012 @ 2:36 PM

Kind of disappointing that in all the Boeheim talk they leave out Pat Sullivan.
  • 0

#107

bbd

bbd

    Channel Surfer

Posted Dec 18, 2012 @ 3:08 PM

Do you mean Pat Summitt?
  • 1

#108

Doom

Doom

    Stalker

Posted Dec 18, 2012 @ 3:46 PM

Yeah, stupid multitasking.
  • 0

#109

Doom

Doom

    Stalker

Posted Dec 26, 2012 @ 11:47 AM

If you don't have access to ESPN today, you can stream it here. Every time I look up, that's all they're showing.
  • 0

#110

xaxat

xaxat

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 19, 2013 @ 12:34 PM

The producers at ESPN TV and radio must be so happy the week is over. It seemed like very day there was breaking news that blew up whatever plans they had for the day. The Armstrong/Te'o stories managed to pushed the NFL to the back burner. And to top it all off, last night, when they finally got to talk to Te'o, they had live late sports on both ESPN and ESPN2 and had to send people to ESPN News for coverage.
  • 0

#111

bulldawgtownie

bulldawgtownie

    Stalker

Posted Jan 19, 2013 @ 4:01 PM

I think they were probably happy because there isn't as much really big news to talk about. The NFL season is coming to a close and there are only two games for them to talk about, for some reason there have only been a couple of NBA games each of the last few games to cover, plus there's no baseball, hockey, or even nascar to talk about. If it weren't for the Armstrong and Te'o storys, IMO it'll be a really boring time in the sports world.

Edited by bulldawgtownie, Jan 19, 2013 @ 4:03 PM.

  • 0

#112

Doom

Doom

    Stalker

Posted Feb 9, 2013 @ 1:53 PM

ESPN, stop trying to make 'foul' happen. Coaches are by and large choosing NOT to foul when they have a 3 or 4 point lead with just seconds remaining. They want to actually play the fucking game. I'm so fucking sick of ESPN's announcers again and again and again in basketball whether nba or college, saying this shit. STFU. The latest was in the regular time period of the Wisconsin/Michigan game. Whatever idiot ESPN had doing color commentary kept saying it. Foul foul foul. NO. Coaches aren't doing that. Which is great, because we'd be robbed of great moments and great shots and players actually playing the fucking game. Yes people take fouls at times when there is a foul to give. But not trying to send someone to the free throw line for 2 shots when you have a 3 point lead so that you will have a 1-point lead and the ball. Why not just foul the whole game then, dummies, every time you have a lead. Just empty the bench and use all your fouls. Why? Because that isn't basketball, so stop it. It's just like the "don't jump to pass" stupidity.

And I love Dick Vitale but even he does it. STOP IT ESPN. For the love of god, haha. I'm just a little upset.
  • 0

#113

bulldawgtownie

bulldawgtownie

    Stalker

Posted Feb 9, 2013 @ 2:01 PM

On top of that, I've watch a lot of basketball games throughout the years and that "strategy" works about 0.00001% of the time.
  • 0

#114

azazel

azazel

    Couch Potato

Posted Feb 10, 2013 @ 9:59 AM

Actually, if you watch Hardaway's shot late in regulation, the Wisconsin player is hacking away, the ref just didn't call it. And I'm guessing Michigan wanted to foul Brust, just didn't have time before he got the shot off.

Meanwhile, Notre Dame and Louisville got into a five-overtime marathon last night! What a great day of hoops it was. Plus we get Indiana at Ohio State today, which should be crazy good if this week's Big Ten games were any indication.
  • 0

#115

BDArizona

BDArizona

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 17, 2013 @ 6:40 PM

And I'm guessing Michigan wanted to foul Brust, just didn't have time before he got the shot off.

Beilein said that this was the intent. So, yeah, some coaches do go with this strategy.

There's also a reason for fouling late in the game that doesn't hold early in the game. It's a very good reason--the time left on the clock. If you're down to just a couple of seconds or a few tenths, the foul-when-up-by-3 strategy is sound. It's if it's done too early that it doesn't make sense. Besides, it's not like giving fouls on purpose hasn't long been part of the strategy of basketball. It's as much part of the game as shooting the ball into the hoop.
  • 1

#116

Doom

Doom

    Stalker

Posted Feb 18, 2013 @ 10:04 AM

So, yeah, some coaches do go with this strategy.

So I guess they're just bad at executing it, or guess the refs won't call it, or the refs won't call it. I don't know what is happening at the ends of games, but the end result is that players aren't getting foul calls to shoot 2 free throws when the other team is up by 3.

Besides, it's not like giving fouls on purpose hasn't long been part of the strategy of basketball. It's as much part of the game as shooting the ball into the hoop.

Yeah I was a little heated at that moment. It's just frustrating to hear this same thing being brought out by the commentators and it almost never occurs. Instead, we get 5-overtime gems. I'd rather have that. It would even be fine if they mentioned it as a possible option. Instead, they repeat it over one another in a tone of scolding and warning. They get fixated on it and just keep saying it.
  • 0

#117

AimingforYoko

AimingforYoko

    Stalker

Posted Mar 5, 2013 @ 7:14 PM

"You come at the king, you best not miss."
Unlike NBCSports and CBSSports, which seem like half-hearted efforts at best, this seems like a real attempt to wrest the crown from you-know-who. Whether or not they're successful is another matter.

Edited by AimingforYoko, Mar 5, 2013 @ 7:15 PM.

  • 0

#118

azazel

azazel

    Couch Potato

Posted Mar 5, 2013 @ 8:00 PM

There is much speculation that the new Fox Sports channel will try to get in on the bidding for Big Ten football when that contract is up within the next couple of years. That could make the network a real player and competition for ESPN.

The money for televising live sports has absolutely exploded within the last few years, mostly because live sports is DVR-proof and can engage a young male demographic.
  • 0

#119

corvus13

corvus13

    Stalker

Posted Mar 5, 2013 @ 10:21 PM

Regis Philbin said he's going to have a show on the new Fox Sports network. I'm sorry, when I think of sports, I don't think of Regis Philbin.
  • 0

#120

Dejana

Dejana

    Couch Potato

Posted Mar 6, 2013 @ 9:49 AM

Regis would always talk sports during the host chat segment of his old morning show. Would have been fun to have him on TV every day as the Manti Te'o girlfriend drama unfolded. It's a little surprising Fox is leading with the Reege as the first big name for the network. He's an institution, but TV seems so fixated on youth normally.

Wasn't there a Fox Sports channel thing about 10-15 years ago? Keith Olbermann ended up there after he parted ways with MSNBC and did a nightly sports news show.

ESPN could use a serious challenge from a rival network.

Edited by Dejana, Mar 6, 2013 @ 12:16 PM.

  • 0