I'm in Spain this week and since there isn't a Spain specific site, no redirect. I want straight to .com.So I try to visit espn.com this evening here in the UK, and instead I'm automatically rerouted to www.espn.co.uk, with no obvious way of getting back to the US site. I know ESPN has tried very hard over the years to finally push me away, but this may actually succeed in doing so.
Not that I'm encouraging you to go back, but if you click on the square in the upper right (looks like 6 dots near the "fantasy" and " login" links), it drops down and gives country selection.So I try to visit espn.com this evening here in the UK, and instead I'm automatically rerouted to www.espn.co.uk, with no obvious way of getting back to the US site. I know ESPN has tried very hard over the years to finally push me away, but this may actually succeed in doing so.
Haha. That's a pretty great post.We saw a weak network. ESPN, let's face it, they're not rich anymore.
Nobody circles that wagons like the Hotel California, that's why they play the game, what a long strange journey its been.The amount of hours ESPN will devote to Berman's farewell season would seem unbearable ... even to those who will watch it.
Let's tack you back, back, back to the early days in Bristol when viewers were left to wonder whether that sideline reporter who had The Catch, Montana to Clark, happen just over his shoulder -- look at that hair on Chris I won't be your beast of Berman -- could that sideline reporter last very long in the business ... could he go all the wayNobody circles that wagons like the Hotel California, that's why the play the game, what a long strange journey its been.
Boomer retiring? TBL says yes: http://thebiglead.com/2016/05/26/chris-berman-retiring-espn-after/
Update: Berman says he's not retiring. Dispute alert: http://nypost.com/2016/05/27/chris-berman-espn-breakup-is-off-to-a-curious-start/
Something nice but also self-serving. Count the references in the telecast to Sager getting the Jimmy V Award at the ESPYsSo ESPN diid something nice today....who knew they had it in them? ESPN having Craig Sager work Game 6 for his first and potentially last NBA Finals ever.
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/16225943/tnt-craig-sager-work-game-6-nba-finals-espn
Yeah, just delete it. It's what Mort would do.Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha. Great bit of Newspeak here.
For accuracy's sake, they should drop "McCann" from the award title.
Skip Bayless Is Zee Worst. Just trolling Lebron and Cleveland *after* they won last night. What a dark, dark man who. I know he's leaving ESPN but he's still there for now, so it fits in this thread.
He is the amalgamation of all the things that are wrong with sports talk. It's all hot takez, without analysis or objectivity. Just making outrageous claims to be a part of the story.
No MNF? No thanks.This is actually smart of them and long overdue. ESPN to start subscription streaming service to combat cord cutters: http://www.macrumors.com/2016/08/09/espn-multi-sport-streaming-service/
I just took a peek at what sports have their own page. Doesn't look like the threshold is high.How does ESPN.com have a page on WWE now? it's fake. it's not a sport. Are they crazy?
Despite the fact that pro wrestling has arguably never been less popular than it is right now; it has managed to garnered more mainstream media coverage over the last couple years. I suppose the thinking is that pro wrestling has a small but consistent fanbase that will tune into ESPN when they normally would not if Coachman is interviewing someone from WWE (which he does every Tuesday). ESPN is not the only company that is doing this, Sports Illustrated, FS1, Rolling Stone and others have dedicated coverage to pro wrestling recently.How does ESPN.com have a page on WWE now? it's fake. it's not a sport. Are they crazy?
Meltzer is the most prominent source but he is far from the only relevant one.There is a certainly an open avenue to cover WWE from a journalistic standpoint if they want, but it doesn't appear that's the approach they are taking. Dave Meltzer has been the only actual journalist covering wrestling for the past 30 years and 99% of the info that floats around the internet comes through him.
@mikeford ALERT ALERT ALERTMeltzer is the most prominent source but he is far from the only relevant one.
Oh, I think this is 100% correct. They had David Shoemaker covering wrestling for them for a while and while Shoemaker is a gifted and talented writer his articles often contained errors or perpetuated urban legends. That's the kind of stuff that an editor or fact checker should have caught, but I doubt there is anyone there who would even know where to look to verify the stuff. In that sense it literally doesn't matter if what they print is correct because the only people that concern themselves with accuracy in wrestling reporting are, in their minds, mouth-breathing hicks and booger-eating nerds (hat tip Colin Cowherd).I think the attitude is that since wrestling is fake it doesn't really matter if they are covering it with the utmost sincerity? Who cares if attendance was 76,000 and not 93,000; it's fake! I
Don't say that to Dr. D., David SchultzI think the attitude is that since wrestling is fake it doesn't really matter if they are covering it with the utmost sincerity? Who cares if attendance was 76,000 and not 93,000; it's fake!
Because like it or not, ESPN is the alpha and omega of the 'legitimate' sports journalism world. When the lines get fuzzy about what they'll stretch where, it's severely problematic.Who gives a shit? This is like being critical of EW because they don't do hard hitting critical reviews of the Bachelor.