ESPN is now dead to me!

[franch1se]

Re: ESPN is now dead to me!

I like Fox Sports 1 after one day. The 2 guys that do highlights (O'Toole and whoever) can hopefully learn to do much better but its a good alternative to ESPN. I like how they give betting odds and other tidbits on the side that aren't typically shown. I've tried to watch it exclusively today instead of ESPN to get a feel for it.

It also seems less professional if that makes sense. Some of the comments they make wouldn't fly in a more professional setting but personally, they made me laugh. Like Andy Roddick saying Karl Malone has big boobs in the selfie he took.

[franch1se]

Re: ESPN is now dead to me!

**** FS1, I hope it dies a horrible death because of what it replaced (SPEED)

didn't even know that channel existed until FS1 came along.

[ImTellinTim]

Re: ESPN is now dead to me!

didn't even know that channel existed until FS1 came along.

Aren't they going to be showing the same races they always had rights to anyway? They had NASCAR truck racing on when I flipped over earlier today. That would be the first and last 5 seconds of NASCAR truck racing I've ever watched.

[Bellsprout]

Aren't they going to be showing the same races they always had rights to anyway? They had NASCAR truck racing on when I flipped over earlier today. That would be the first and last 5 seconds of NASCAR truck racing I've ever watched.

Seems like it. There's motorcycle racing on at the moment.

[Mo]

Re: ESPN is now dead to me!

I thought the Best Damn Sports Show Period had been cancelled? Oh that was their new thing? Yeah, pass

[SPTO]

Re: ESPN is now dead to me!

I thought the Best Damn Sports Show Period had been cancelled? Oh that was their new thing? Yeah, pass

The panel plays THAT much of a role?

I guess they don't have the confidence to let two Canadian guys basically do a wild and zany SC type show.

[Bellsprout]

Re: ESPN is now dead to me!

The panel plays THAT much of a role?

I guess they don't have the confidence to let two Canadian guys basically do a wild and zany SC type show.

I'd say the show is probably 60/40 between Onrait and O'Toole and the panel.

I'd honestly argue the panel segments are worse than when ESPN "experts" appear on SportsCenter. At least they played and have knowledge of the sport they're specializing on. As I said before, Andy Roddick is on this panel. He thinks Clemson can go to the BCS Title Game. Which is great, think that, but why do I at home care what tennis star Andy Roddick thinks about college football?

[l3ulvl]

Re: ESPN is now dead to me!

I'd say the show is probably 60/40 between Onrait and O'Toole and the panel.

I'd honestly argue the panel segments are worse than when ESPN "experts" appear on SportsCenter. At least they played and have knowledge of the sport they're specializing on. As I said before, Andy Roddick is on this panel. He thinks Clemson can go to the BCS Title Game. Which is great, think that, but why do I at home care what tennis star Andy Roddick thinks about college football?

Right, I've always wondered that stuff too. Reminds me of Dave Chappelle, "Who gives a **** what Ja Rule thinks?" "I want some answers that Ja Rule might not have right now."

[SPTO]

Re: ESPN is now dead to me!

Here's an interesting article from the New Republic regarding the dissolution of a partnership between ESPN and PBS's Frontline. While it's true this can't be easily cited "oh ESPN got shut down by the NFL!" It does show that the network shows way too much of a reluctance to go too deep with hard news journalism for fear of hurting its relationship with the NFL. (in this case)

Either way, it's an interesting piece and it shows that ESPN isn't as free to be a hard hitting journalistic entity as it sometimes wants you to believe.

[VDusen04]

Re: ESPN is now dead to me!

Here's an interesting article from the New Republic regarding the dissolution of a partnership between ESPN and PBS's Frontline. While it's true this can't be easily cited "oh ESPN got shut down by the NFL!" It does show that the network shows way too much of a reluctance to go too deep with hard news journalism for fear of hurting its relationship with the NFL. (in this case)

Either way, it's an interesting piece and it shows that ESPN isn't as free to be a hard hitting journalistic entity as it sometimes wants you to believe.

Thanks for the link. This about sums it up for me:

Most observers generally agree that, when it comes to the $40 billion self-anointed Worldwide Leader in Sports, ESPN can do great work and also can also find its work corrupted. The latter happens when it caters to the lowest common denominator (see: Skip Bayless, saturated coverage of Tim Tebow) or, more ominously, when it pulls punches when reporting on sports because it is also broadcasting partners with the leagues it is reporting on.

[jyoung]

Re: ESPN is now dead to me!

Cancelling ESPN's Playmakers series after just one season was a much worse affront than this.

Playmakers will likely go down as the best sports drama of all-time.

[Bellsprout]

Cancelling ESPN's Playmakers series after just one season was a much worse affront than this.

Playmakers will likely go down as the best sports drama of all-time.

No it wasn't. If it pissed off the NFL then it's good business to get rid of it. That's completely different than going easy on them with news reporting.

[SPTO]

Re: ESPN is now dead to me!

What Dayman says is correct plus, Playmakers was fictionalized. While there may be some basis for the storylines it was all made up and exaggerated for drama's sake.

This is a different matter where ESPN got cold feet because they don't want to be seen as digging into the NFL's dirty laundry and possibly hurting their relationship.

[Jr.]

Re: ESPN is now dead to me!

Here's a good article with some explanation about ESPN's decision from their Ombudsman:

http://espn.go.com/blog/ombudsman/post/_/id/96/was-espn-sloppy-naive-or-compromised

I guess this is ESPN's explanation for ending the relationship with Frontline:

Skipper didn’t attend the event, and said he was “startled” when he read about a promotional trailer for the documentary which was screened at the news conference. He hadn’t seen the trailer or approved its content, which included the ESPN logo and a collaboration credit. He thought it was “odd for me not to get a heads up,” and said it made him “quite unhappy” to discover that ESPN had no editorial control over the trailer.
Upon screening it, Skipper said he found the trailer to be “sensational.” He particularly objected to the tagline -- “Get ready to change the way you see the game” -- and to the final sound bite in the piece, from neuropathologist Ann McKee. Referring to brain injuries, she says, “I’m really wondering if every single football player doesn’t have this.”

Skipper said he found that comment to be “over the top.”

[Majingir]

Re: ESPN is now dead to me!

I was watching US Open(Tennis on ESPN) and it really shows the difference between American and Canadian broadcasters.

Lets say Player A was dominating the match.....

ESPN: Praises Player A so much,and acts like Player B doesn't exist in the match anymore and they aren't good at tennis.

Canada: Praises Player A, and offers constructive criticism of Player B and talks about the good and bads of both Player A and B in that days matchup.