ESPN Is Pathetic

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
They're going to end up gutting ALL of their beat coverage. As good as some of these reporters are, the bean counters see their jobs as easily replaceable by interns with a twitter account.
 

Statman

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2005
1,057
Los Angeles, CA
Insane that Stein is being let go. He was probably the most reliable NBA news breaker after Woj.

ESPN is doubling down on NFL and college football and gutting their NBA and MLB coverage. Fuck them.
 

NortheasternPJ

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 16, 2004
19,272
Insane that Stein is being let go. He was probably the most reliable NBA news breaker after Woj.

ESPN is doubling down on NFL and college football and gutting their NBA and MLB coverage. Fuck them.
You mean NBA, MLB and NHL.

So basically they're the NFL network featuring some college ball.
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,090
Tuukka's refugee camp
They're not gutting it per se. They're mainly outsourcing parts to others, with Intentional Talk being the biggest example. Given most of the talking heads are entirely replaceable, it's not the worst idea from a business perspective. I don't necessarily agree with getting rid of a Stein or Katz since they don't seem overly replaceable but what do I know. Their business model is shifting from a breaking news focus to more of a reporting the breaking news focus. Reasonable minds can debate about this strategy given shifts in consumer tastes regarding breaking news.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,277
“@chadfordinsider: Layoffs end my 16 yr run covering the NBA Draft for ESPN on June 30. Will do my best to make next 60 days special for our Insider readers”


So. So stupid. But HEY! At least I can get all HOT TAKEZ in one place!
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
26,993
Newton
I find the Intentional Talk thing to be bizarre. How expensive could a show like Baseball Tonight really be? It's a show with four guys discussing clips of games. If no one is watching clips shows anymore, fine I get it. But why are you using that time to show another clips show?
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,090
Tuukka's refugee camp
I find the Intentional Talk thing to be bizarre. How expensive could a show like Baseball Tonight really be? It's a show with four guys discussing clips of games. If no one is watching clips shows anymore, fine I get it. But why are you using that time to show another clips show?
Because they also avoid the cost of having a few camera guys, producers, editors, etc. The back of the house stuff adds up on those shows too.
 

Mueller's Twin Grannies

critical thinker
SoSH Member
Dec 19, 2009
9,386
Intentional Talk isn't a clip show. It's a talk show. The show's signature segment is "Got Heeem!" I don't think I even need to explain the segment for you to get why ESPN wants it.

Edit: Missed an e
 
Last edited:

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,090
Tuukka's refugee camp
People also forget SoSH isn't exactly the target audience for mass media. I don't watch Intentional Talk but god forbid TV programs trying to have fun.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,673
I get that they are under the same umbrella, but is ESPN.com really the big money pit here, or is it the network? It seems like a lot of the cuts have been to online writers, with a few casualties for the network as well. Again, when you are paying $30 billion for the NFL cutting out $10 million or whatever in salary what move the bottom line.
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,090
Tuukka's refugee camp
Well it's $10 million or whatever annually so you're comparing apples and oranges. Regardless, just because the status quo is the status quo, it doesn't mean it's appropriate.
 

sox311

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 30, 2004
1,753
That's what she said.
Ford, Stein, and Katz are shockers. Especially with the growth in popularity the NBA is seeing now. I guess is Stein and Woj don't get along that makes sense.

Lord knows they aren't going to let Simmons scoop up Zach Lowe, so he is safe.

I too am a 37 year old who's high school, college, and shortly after ESPN was always on in the background. But it has not been in the picture for many years now. But I miss it. I miss the highlights. Not the people talking. That was what lost me.

I would like to see what savings they are getting, what writers like Stark, Cable, Strauss make a year.

It has to be a move for the future of their platform too. They have lost me on the TV when it isn't a live game and just after. And I am not a cord cutter and never plan to be.
 

Mueller's Twin Grannies

critical thinker
SoSH Member
Dec 19, 2009
9,386
Woj doesn't worship at the altar of LeBron. They only want sycophants at ESPN.
As snarky as that comment is, it's also very accurate. ESPN cares about brands and brand awareness more than sports at this point and there's no bigger brand than the likes of Lebron (especially with Kobe done) in terms of superstar status. He's poised to be THE focal point of the NBA for a long time and will be the cornerstone of most of ESPN's coverage, so why chase stories that aren't worthy of PTI-style debates or not about how he's awesome? Everything else will be reduced to highlights and catchphrases.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
I would watch more, as well. But apparently there is a huge segment of the population that would rather seek out their own highlights and watch them on the phone? Or something else millennial that I don't understand.
Every major sport website has a game recap. What's hard to understand?
 
I know, but I doubt the B and below teams on FS1 are making much above ESPNU coin given the BE ratings. While the BE ratings are growing for FS1, games still average less than 200,000 viewers. That's still more than a million less than ESPN.
How much do the lesser commentators on ESPN (including ESPNU) make per game? Does anyone know? I'm curious what all of these cuts mean for the rank and file that are still required to be there calling all of the games that still make ESPN an attractive viewing destination for so many people.
 

MuzzyField

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
How much do the lesser commentators on ESPN (including ESPNU) make per game? Does anyone know? I'm curious what all of these cuts mean for the rank and file that are still required to be there calling all of the games that still make ESPN an attractive viewing destination for so many people.
There are a bunch of local sports folks doing ESPN3 work. The talent supply is going up. This pool is not only cheaper, but requires much less for travel. These productions are also expanding the production pool with young talent that is getting directing, graphics and replay experience. They're getting freelance gigs beyond rolling cable.

The other pressure, as done for some of the 2016 NCAA women's tourney (not sure about 2017) and a big chunk of the Rio games. More announcing and event production (minus camera and audio) for Rio was done in Stanford and Bristol can do the same. A PBP/analyst team can do five games a week and never leave home.

We are certainly in the midst of changing times. At some point the NFL will even feel it. The college age audience/fans would rather watch people compete in Madden instead of an actual game and follow fantasy via an app. Good luck converting them into watchers of three-plus hour games. At least real players aren't getting hurt in Madden.

Those of us that actually enjoy watching games and nuanced sports discussion may be the dinosaurs. A few King James dunks followed by a 20 minute discussion on his favorite video games, movies and business interests and what that means to the world is the new SC model. They've already started to take the word sports out of the branding.
 
Last edited:

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,090
Tuukka's refugee camp
I needed "Get off my lawn" to hit bingo. Damn.

Yes, millennials suck and have no appreciation for the game, just like the four of my friends (4-6 years out of college) who went to the bar tonight to watch a Caps-Pens game we didn't care about and watched it through the lenses of four guys who played hockey together in college. Probably would've been similar if we just simmed it on NHL.

Live sports is literally all these channels have going for it. It's a reason the music industry is floundering but the concert industry is thriving. Collective live experiences are still valuable. Sports and music are the best examples. They're also not going away.

So basically, fuck yo couch.
 
Last edited:

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,277
There are a bunch of local sports folks doing ESPN3 work. The talent supply is going up. This pool is not only cheaper, but requires much less for travel. These productions are also expanding the production pool with young talent that is getting directing, graphics and replay experience. They're getting freelance gigs beyond rolling cable.

The other pressure, as done for some of the 2016 NCAA women's tourney (not sure about 2017) and a big chunk of the Rio games. More announcing and event production (minus camera and audio) for Rio was done in Stanford and Bristol can do the same. A PBP/analyst team can do five games a week and never leave home.

We are certainly in the midst of changing times. At some point the NFL will even feel it. The college age audience/fans would rather watch people compete in Madden instead of an actual game and follow fantasy via an app. Good luck converting them into watchers of three-plus hour games. At least real players aren't getting hurt in Madden.


Those of us that actually enjoy watching games and nuanced sports discussion may be the dinosaurs. A few King James dunks followed by a 20 minute discussion on his favorite video games, movies and business interests and what that means to the world is the new SC model. They've already started to take the word sports out of the branding.
100% false…. I don’t know any person who would rather watch a Madden competition than an actual game… Hell Go look at big time college sports schools (Like IU/UCLA/USC etc). They pack those arenas to the brink. The only people who I know who watch E-sports (like madden) are the type that have been addicted to things like WOW and could give a rats ass about actual sports. In fact most of the people I watch sports with despise HOT TAKEZ news (like me) and would rather watch sports shows that use stats and level headed analysis

(PS. I’m the age group you are talking about (I’m 23)
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,673
I graduated college last year; almost any fan of NBA basketball could tell you who Stephen A Smith was; I honestly think I might have been the only person who knew who Zach Lowe was. Most people my age would much rather watch First Take than say, Lowe talking to Howard Beck.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,020
Oregon
Linda Cohn says ESPN woes partially related to politics

"I felt that the old-school viewers were put in a corner. And not appreciated with all these other changes," Cohn said during a radio appearance on "The Bernie and Sid Show" via the New York Post. "They forgot their core. You should never forget your core. And be grateful for your core group."
http://www.sportingnews.com/other-sports/news/linda-cohn-sportscenter-espn-layoffs-new-york-post-the-bernie-and-sid-show-wabc/xti6exskx6wp19v8pegqu7quz
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
I think she may be correct in that ESPN moved away from its "core" but not so much insofar as politics go. I couldn't give two shits about their politics. They didn't lose me due to politics, they lost me due to moving away from the games being the story. I'm not bothered that they gave an ESPY to Caitlyn Jenner, regardless of their motivations. I'm bothered more by the fact that the ESPYs exist at all.

ESPN's core audience was hardcore sports fans. People who wanted to watch sports all the time, not watch people talk about things tangentially related to sports. Unless you're showing highlights of last night's Cavs game, I don't care what Lebron is doing.

Remember when ESPNews was created as basically a 24-hour Sportscenter? THAT was for me and the "core" ESPN audience. Look at ESPNews now. In the next 24 hours (11am Sunday to 11am Monday), there are exactly five hours of Sportscenter scheduled (8-11pm, 3:30-5:30am). The rest is reruns of OTL and Sports Reporters, reruns of E60 episodes, and reruns of SC Featured which is essentially "human interest" stories that have run on Sportscenter. So five hours of news/highlights and 19 hours of fluff and talk.

That's the fall of ESPN in a nutshell.
 

MuzzyField

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
100% false…. I don’t know any person who would rather watch a Madden competition than an actual game… Hell Go look at big time college sports schools (Like IU/UCLA/USC etc). They pack those arenas to the brink. The only people who I know who watch E-sports (like madden) are the type that have been addicted to things like WOW and could give a rats ass about actual sports. In fact most of the people I watch sports with despise HOT TAKEZ news (like me) and would rather watch sports shows that use stats and level headed analysis

(PS. I’m the age group you are talking about (I’m 23)
I'd take issue with your overall assessment. Foy you, and those in your circle sure, but many P5 schools, with a few exceptions, have overbuilt and overpriced. Student demand is down and the non-student pool is being purged by couch-gating and cost increases. The new pro stadiums and arenas aren't exactly super sizing either and their top dollar seats and suites feature plenty of non-game related perks and enticements.

Combine this with the fact that most people in every age group/demographic don't give a rats ass about any sport and their ability to avoid subsidizing sports through subscription fees and still access the content they want is an interesting puzzle for ESPN and the rest of the sports power structure to attempt to solve and time isn't an ally in this process.
 

Blacken

Robespierre in a Cape
SoSH Member
Jul 24, 2007
12,152
Henry Abott(@TrueHoop on Twitter) was also let go.
They didn't just let Henry go, they axed almost everybody in the TrueHoop group. Which is...insane, because they and the podcasts they were doing were literally the best thing ESPN did, to the point everybody else was trying to emulate them.

I have never watched ESPN's TV offerings because I am not an Old but I'm bummed for a lot of great people this week.
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
61,996
New York City
No, she's really not.

I'm assuming you mean that the ESPN skewing "liberal" have somehow killed the channel.

That's fucking stupid.
It's such a ridiculous and lazy take, too. Trump winning an election and giving Jenner an ESPY didn't matter. What mattered is that 8 million(estimate, not sure of the number) people have cut the cord and, at the same time, ESPN has overspent on live sports. So their revenues are declining and their expenses are increasing. That's not sustainable.

Caitlyn doesn't change that calculus.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
It has nothing to do with politics but their programming choices haven't helped. They moved the story away from the actual sports. The people reporting often become bigger than the games.
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
63,743
Rotten Apple
The complaining and wishcasting about ESPN here and other places is incorrect and slightly silly.

ESPN is underwater for a simple reason. They are paying out more money then they are taking in. How did this happen?

The people in charge looked at the subscription numbers which were going north and made large longterm over-priced payouts based on those numbers, hubris and some fear of losing them to the competition. After the deals had been signed, the cord cutting began and their subscription numbers went the opposite direction. You can see the contracts they signed here: http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2015/10/26/Media/ESPN.aspx and analysis here: https://www.fool.com/investing/2016/10/27/espn-spends-more-on-content-than-anyone-else-inclu.aspx and here: http://www.outkickthecoverage.com/the-nba-tv-contract-isn-t-sustainable-070616
“It’s been a total mismanagement of rights fees, starting with the NFL renewal,” said one former employee. “We overpaid significantly when it did not need to be that way, and it set the template to overpay for MLB and the NBA.”
Between the NFL, NBA, MLB, and College Football Playoff, ESPN has $33.27 billion in long-term content obligations. That blows Netflix's oft-scrutinized long-term content obligations out of the water.
TL;DR: ESPN is paying out more money for content (roughly $6 to $7 billion dollars a year) than any other media platform and is now scrambling to re-do contracts, cut costs and raise revenue to cover these costs.
The deals were so bad they had to let go other properties they used to have (NASCAR, World Cup) and are trying to cut costs in every possible way, including layoffs. It has nothing to do with how many highlights they run, how Libturd they might be or how well known SAS is. They wrote checks they can no longer afford. Period.
 

Vinho Tinto

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 9, 2003
7,047
Auburn, MA
ESPN is underwater for a simple reason. They are paying out more money then they are taking in. How did this happen?.
ESPN is not losing money. It still posts a profit as does the overall cable division for Disney. The problem is that ESPN's revenues are declining and it, by itself, is why Disney did not reach expected earnings.