Sports Media Discussion...

[Bellsprout]

I figured it would be kind of cool to have a thread where we could talk about sports media. Things like ESPN, writers coming and going to different places, shows on these networks that we like or dislike, that kind of stuff.

I'd rather this not just become an airing of grievances about ESPN, but if they do something to piss you off, feel free.

Anywho, I'll start with this bit of news. Jim Rome's show "Jim Rome is Burning" has not been renewed by ESPN and will be heading over to CBS Sports Network some time in the near future.

http://thebiglead.com/index.php/2012/01/06/jim-romes-espn-contract-is-up-and-hes-taking-his-tv-show-to-the-cbs-sports-network/

I did always kind of get the feeling that JRIB was a bit of a second class citizen over there. It's not even in HD yet, is it?

This is a pretty big boon for CBS Sports Network, I think, which currently has 0 shows that anybody gives a damn about. At least now they'll get Rome's audience, however many people that is.

[DJ]

Re: Sports Media Discussion...

I do want to say this about ESPN:

It drives me nuts that they only report on certain stories each day. I watched some SportsCenter this morning and they spent a bunch of time talking about the new Penn St. football coach, the BCS Championship and then squeezed in NBA Highlights ... of which they were the Lakers and Heat (big shock).

NO NHL highlights at all. Really drives me nuts that the sport gets no play on the network. ESPN is more about the pre-story and off-field drama than the actual games these days. I'm sure it gets them ratings, but it's very annoying. The NBA reporting is terrible, imo. All rumor and heresay without any real facts.

OK, back to the topic.

I'm glad Rome is moving to CBS. He never really fit the ESPN mold and they never did anything to promote his show, although if you listen to his radio show, you're not missing much with the TV show as it's basically the same thing, aside from the Forum and Correspondent pieces.

I have to say that I spend a lot of time at SI.com. I really like its stable of writers; Peter King, Tom Verducci, Chris Mannix, etc. are all very good and easy reads. Hot Clicks is also fun to look at.

[TheMatrix31]

Re: Sports Media Discussion...

Sports league networks are so much better than ESPN.

Though Irvin and Sanders are destroying my ability to tolerate NFL Network.

I liked what I saw from NBC Sports Network (the old Versus) in their Sportscenter-esque show.

But really, as sad as it is, all these shows are extinct with the emergence of Twitter. By the time something gets reported on TV, it's been on Twitter for half an hour already.

[LingeringRegime]

Re: Sports Media Discussion...

Nice that Rome is going to CBS didn't even know that.

I hardly watch ESPN anymore. I try to watch them after the Bobcats play well, just to see if they make the cut. When they beat the Knicks they showed about 8 highlight plays from the Knicks, and two from the winning team. But, that is par for the course.

Oh, and check the sig. I really like NBCSN. It has professionalism, none of this debating **** that ESPN does on virtually every show.

[BlueNGold]

Re: Sports Media Discussion...

Great thread idea.

About the NHL/ESPN thing DJ mentioned, I will say they do a hell of a lot better job covering it now than I ever remember. This past year or 2 you'll actually see NHL stories on ESPN.com's home page and in the headlines section. I hardly remember seeing that before.

[areobee401]

Re: Sports Media Discussion...

Local sports talk radio for me. I find it's the only place for an honest opinion on issues not involving local teams. That and they have no agenda while doing so. ESPN radio and the TV network do nothing more than promote their own brand.

For highlights I go with the league networks. Only place you can actually see highlights from every game. With twitter and radio I can get all my news before anything is reported on TV.

[DJ]

Re: Sports Media Discussion...

Great thread idea.

About the NHL/ESPN thing DJ mentioned, I will say they do a hell of a lot better job covering it now than I ever remember. This past year or 2 you'll actually see NHL stories on ESPN.com's home page and in the headlines section. I hardly remember seeing that before.

They do have good writers for the NHL on the website. Back when ESPN had the NHL TV rights, there was a 30-minute highlight show dedicated to hockey. Once they lost the TV rights, they droppped the show and now you're lucky to see a couple of highlights on SC, and usually that's only if the Pens, Caps, Bruins, Rangers, Flyers, Red Wings or Blackhawks are playing.

[VDusen04]

Re: Sports Media Discussion...

I do want to say this about ESPN:

It drives me nuts that they only report on certain stories each day. I watched some SportsCenter this morning and they spent a bunch of time talking about the new Penn St. football coach, the BCS Championship and then squeezed in NBA Highlights ... of which they were the Lakers and Heat (big shock).

NO NHL highlights at all. Really drives me nuts that the sport gets no play on the network. ESPN is more about the pre-story and off-field drama than the actual games these days. I'm sure it gets them ratings, but it's very annoying. The NBA reporting is terrible, imo. All rumor and heresay without any real facts.

You know, that's a great set of points. I know the primary point of this thread is not to air grievances, but I feel this is a big thing to bring about anytime ESPN is being discussed. I'm really quite displeased and disappointed with ESPN's shift over to, as you said DJ, pre-story and off-field drama. I got rid of my cable a few years ago so I don't see Sportscenter as much. But when I do, you're exactly right. I have to ask myself, "Why am I watching Sportscenter?"

For a lot of my life, Sporstscenter was a show I could watch that'd get me caught up on all the happenings in the sports world. In one hour (used to be just a half hour) I could get healthy highlights from every pro game from the night before (sometimes with a score only for a '97 Raptors-Grizzlies affair) and I'd be briefed on all sports news. I could see everything I needed to see. Then it'd start over in case I missed anything. There was routine and there was scheduling and there was a way to know what to expect.

Now, when watching Sportscenter, it's completely unfulfilling because I find myself holding out through 20 minutes of talk about an off-field story in hopes a highlight or two may pop up (followed by 20 more minutes of off-field). It's tiring and it's depressing. I feel like nearly every news story these days is a victim of over-coverage. It's a shame that spilled into sports TV.

I miss the days of Sportscenter openings saying something like, "We'll start things off with David Robinson, who is having one heck of a year, averaging 29.4 points per game while leading his team in rebounds, blocks, and assists. Sports Illustrated recently dubbed him 'Mr. MVP'. Meanwhile, the Suns Charles Barkley knows a thing or two about being MVP. Now, down to Phoenix for the highlights" (cue highlight music). The highlights would then be followed by some post-game comments, then we'd move on.

If David Robinson's MVP run existed nowadays, that game against Phoenix would be met with reactions, suspicions, rumors, and analysis for 15 minutes (followed by a five minute break to catch you up on other sports stories) then back for more San Antonio/Phoenix breakdown. Does David have what it takes? Will his charitable off-court work affect his on-court play? What do you see when you look into his eyes? Are David Robinson and Charles Barkley actually friends, or secretly mortal enemies? Who's more chiseled, Sylvester Stallone or David Robinson? Oversaturation to the max.

I liked ESPNNEWS for a while, because that seemed to be more classic highlights and progress. But even that channel seemed to be getting infiltrated by the over-analysis bug. Toward the end of my cable run, FSN's Final Score was my favorite highlight show. Clips from all games, a sidebar showing what was forthcoming, a Play of the Night, and all within a half hour. Beautiful.

[FreAk47]

Re: Sports Media Discussion...

^^^^ Well said. Another thing they over-analyze and absolutely beat to death is the NFL Draft. Do we really need to have a 10 minute segment of Mel Kiper and Todd McShay re-arranging the same 10 guys on their draft boards in November? They start so early with that stuff these days, the championship game hasn't even been played yet and they are already talking about draft stocks rising and falling. They spend 5 months beating the hell out of it, then the draft happens and everything they predicted was wrong...so I'm not really sure how they are draft "experts"

It seems like ESPN's version of an "expert" is anyone who's ever played the sport...

[SPTO]

Re: Sports Media Discussion...

Interesting thread idea, here in Canada the two main sports shows are more highlights driven though definitely skewed toward hockey which is natural I guess given where the shows emanate from which drives me a little batty. SportsNet does have "experts" give their take on things every once in a while but it isn't in the form of a cliched debate and you do get a heavy dose of highlights.

ESPN seems to have taken the route that the cable news networks have taken with their primetime programming of being more "infotainment" rather than news gathering/showing of highlights. I think that's a good alternative in small doses but when 85-90% is seemingly all opinion/conjecture it can be a real pain in the ***.

I do see where the people of ESPN are going with this as the twitterverse and internet has made the old format a dinosaur but I do think a balance of the two would be a better formula. ESPN also has a terrible track record of not giving a damn about a sport if they don't have the rights. Look at the NHL for instance, ever since the NHL has been off of ESPN it has gotten very short shrift unless you read the NHL section of the website.

Anyways, I think CBS and to a lesser extent Fox Sports does a much better job of mixing opinion and news though i'm mainly exposed to their websites so I don't know how well that translates to their TV product.

I'm hoping NBCSN works as I think they'll take a more professional and "grown up" approach to covering sports with little to no fluff added in.

[Gotmadskillzson]

Re: Sports Media Discussion...

I miss ESPN of the 80s and early 90s. It was way better back then. ESPN was more of a man's channel where you got scores and highlights all day long. Now, way too much talking and highlights of big market teams only.

But now, like others have said, you better off using Twitter and other resources to get info.

[DJ]

Re: Sports Media Discussion...

What baseball-dedicated blogs out there would you guys recommend?

[Bellsprout]

Re: Sports Media Discussion...

I'm a big fan of SBNation's team-specific blogs.

I visit Brew Crew Ball every day.

This would be the one for your Rockies: http://www.purplerow.com/

Other than that, as far as national ones go, the only one I really drop by daily is HardballTalk.

[dickey1331]

I'm just glad my cable network finally got MLB network. As for ESPN I watch ESPNEWS.


Do you really care where I sent this from?

[Bellsprout]

Re: Sports Media Discussion...

ESPN could be losing Scott Van Pelt and Michelle Beadle

Two HUGE losses, if they both leave.

Losing Van Pelt means losing one of their best SportsCenter anchors and a fantastic radio personality.

Beadle is the only reason SportsNation is close to watchable, and losing her would completely **** a show that has been a pretty decent success for ESPN.

I would be surprised if ESPN loses either of them, though. Van Pelt seems comfortable in his roles from what I've seen and heard from him, and Beadle's simply too valuable to ESPN to let her get away.