The Worldwide Leader in Thin-skinned Overreaction

[thebruce44]

I don't disagree at all. ESPN though doesn't stand for MLB, Baseball Network, etc. I just don't see the need to bash on ESPN over and over and over and over. They're not going to be a solution for every team. Again, why in the world would they show a ton of Brewers stuff? Relatively speaking nobody cares about the Brewers on a national level.

 

So by that logic, why should I care about Prince, Braun, or even Zack Greinke or other small market players? You think those guys don't sell?

 

ESPN was worthwhile before Disney took control for the simple reason that there haven't been other national options. Now that we have NFL, NBA, MLB, Big 10, and hopefully some day a Big East network we finally don't have to watch what Michael Eisner/Bob Iger/Steve Jobs decides we will watch.

 

I hope you do well with your overlords, but I plan to get information that is useful in my fantasy leagues and find out who is the best short stop in baseball is not named Derek Jeter.

 

Again, it is a business. ESPN isn't some PBS type channel. If you don't like it, don't watch.

 

Done, except for the Big East.

 

You can keep ripping on it, but it has worked for decades.

 

Again, if you haven't noticed the change in ESPN then you are right where Marvel, Pixar, Saban Engertainment, ABC, and Miramax want you...at a Jonas Brothers concert drinking a bud light.

 

Enjoy. I will be watching sports.

[Invader3K]

To be fair, Baseball Tonight does talk about teams other than the Yankees/Red Sox. Last night I saw them talking about the Nationals' season outlook in 2010. So they do talk about the small markets on that show. But if you're watching Sportscenter expecting to see Brewers or Bucks highlights, good luck.

[JJHardy7]

So by that logic, why should I care about Prince, Braun, or even Zack Greinke or other small market players? You think those guys don't sell?

 

ESPN was worthwhile before Disney took control for the simple reason that there haven't been other national options. Now that we have NFL, NBA, MLB, Big 10, and hopefully some day a Big East network we finally don't have to watch what Michael Eisner/Bob Iger/Steve Jobs decides we will watch.

 

I hope you do well with your overlords, but I plan to get information that is useful in my fantasy leagues and find out who is the best short stop in baseball is not named Derek Jeter.

 

I didn't say that. My point is that it is a national show. It isn't a Midwest channel or anything like that. I think having more specific channels is a great thing. No doubt about it. ESPN is serving a very broad national based viewer.

 

Also, I think you might be taking this a bit personal. I could care less about who watches ESPN, but there is a method to their madness. I barely watch it except for sporting events and SportsCenter. I don't use SportsCenter as the end all of knowledge...I think the Internet IMO has really become a path for become to look for good analysis on the topic they are interested in.

[thebruce44]

I didn't say that. My point is that it is a national show.

 

Yes, but you did say "Again, why in the world would they show a ton of Brewers stuff? Relatively speaking nobody cares about the Brewers on a national level." By extension you are saying nobody cares about those stud players I mentioned, which really isn't true. I enjoy watching a network that covers those players as well as the East Coast Teams. I enjoy trade speculation that doesn't start and end with every good player in middle America going to a coast. If SportsCenter refuses to do this, which they have for quite a while, then why chastise people for ripping on them? It seems pretty reasonable and logical to me.

 

All that being said, I do agree that baseball tonight has gotten a little better recently. Coincidence that it happened when MLB Network started pulling viewers? I doubt it.

[JJHardy7]

Yes, but you did say "Again, why in the world would they show a ton of Brewers stuff? Relatively speaking nobody cares about the Brewers on a national level." By extension you are saying nobody cares about those stud players I mentioned, which really isn't true. I enjoy watching a network that covers those players as well as the East Coast Teams. I enjoy trade speculation that doesn't start and end with every good player in middle America going to a coast. If SportsCenter refuses to do this, which they have for quite a while, then why chastise people for ripping on them? It seems pretty reasonable and logical to me.

 

All that being said, I do agree that baseball tonight has gotten a little better recently. Coincidence that it happened when MLB Network started pulling viewers? I doubt it.

 

My point is that over the course of time a team like the Brewers just isn't a major national draw. I love the Brewers and love Braun and Fielder. They'd have a ton more exposure in a bigger market...not because their hate would say Yankees or Red Sox...but because those teams have MAJOR national draws. The Brewers really don't. I think when the Brewers (or a small market team) are competitive and fighting for a playoff spot they get their fair share. The problem is big payroll teams are located in bigger markets and a little big more consistent in terms of wins year in and year out.

 

Don't get me wrong...I wish ESPN and other major sports networks would cover the Brewers as much as possible. I just think that the average baseball fan that isn't a Brewers fan doesn't have a lot of interest in the Brewers. Does that make sense? I'm not saying WE should not care about them...I just don't know if people in California, Texas, New York, etc. care all that much about the Brewers and teams in that market. Obviously it hasn't hurt some of our studs when it comes to all-star games, but the team as a whole is likely not going to be a major national draw.

[BrewCrewForever]

The Clampdown leader has now pulled Peter Pascarelli off the (formerly very) entertaining Baseball Today podcast.

 

Pascarelli has made a name for himself by being the grouchy old scribe who called in (usually from some miserable airport) to do a daily in-season baseball podcast with Eric Karabell. It was a great show, with both guys bringing a Felix and Oscar rapport to the show.

 

Pascarelli ripped on the Bud Selig statue idea, and then the next day, made an offschedule apology about his comments, and now he's gone.

 

Work for ESPN, rip an on-air personality, or a league commissioner at your own peril.

I was very disappointed in this. I downloaded the podcast from Thursday and there was no Pascarelli and not even a mention of him. It was Karabell all alone talking to Buster Olney for a bit on the phone. Karabell is okay, but it is not the same without Peter. I always looked forward to the Baseball Today podcast, not sure I will anymore. While I don't agree with what Peter said about the Bud statue, to take him off the podcast for that is just stupid.

[thebruce44]

Don't get me wrong...I wish ESPN and other major sports networks would cover the Brewers as much as possible. I just think that the average baseball fan that isn't a Brewers fan doesn't have a lot of interest in the Brewers. Does that make sense? I'm not saying WE should not care about them...I just don't know if people in California, Texas, New York, etc. care all that much about the Brewers and teams in that market. Obviously it hasn't hurt some of our studs when it comes to all-star games, but the team as a whole is likely not going to be a major national draw.

And from traveling around the country I disagree and think a lot of baseball fans are very interested in Prince/Braun and by extension the Brewers. Look at the NFL, everyone knows the up and coming players. Charles Woodson was a national story this year in the smallest market in all of professional sports. Why? Because coverage is a lot more equal and fans want knowledge, not just what is fed to them by ESPN.

 

You said you didn't get why people bash ESPN. I told you why I think its very reasonable and appropriate to bash them. I get your point, I just think its wrong. If you don't want to participate in some venting about ESPN then don't come in an ESPN venting thread and then tell posters in here you think they are the ones taking it personally. Im not trying to be a jerk or overreact myself, just trying to answer the questions you posed.

[JJHardy7]

And from traveling around the country I disagree and think a lot of baseball fans are very interested in Prince/Braun and by extension the Brewers. Look at the NFL, everyone knows the up and coming players. Charles Woodson was a national story this year in the smallest market in all of professional sports. Why? Because coverage is a lot more equal and fans want knowledge, not just what is fed to them by ESPN.

 

Baseballs may very well have some interest in Prince/Braun. What about the Brewers as whole? Again, Prince/Braun have only been in Milwaukee for a few years. I'm not saying they aren't good players...the just play in Milwaukee and that just doesn't excite a lot of national people. It is interesting you bring up the NFL. I think that is not a fair comparison. Woodson also had ton of fanfare in college and was a very high draft pick in a sport where the draft is actually followed by many fans. I hope that one day MLB can be like the NFL in many ways, but I'll try to stay on topic.

 

You said you didn't get why people bash ESPN. I told you why I think its very reasonable and appropriate to bash them. I get your point, I just think its wrong. If you don't want to participate in some venting about ESPN then don't come in an ESPN venting thread and then tell posters in here you think they are the ones taking it personally. Im not trying to be a jerk or overreact myself, just trying to answer the questions you posed.

 

I guess I just think that some people that bash ESPN have unreasonable expectations. I understand why, but it is a national network that is going to try (and I do mean try they aren't perfect) to present stories that most of their viewers are interested. Unfortunately that leaves teams like the Brewers on the outside. And I didn't say other people were taking it personally...you were taking it personally based on your comments directed at me. Again, I could care less who watches ESPN. I just think it does makes sense that they do things they we they do. And again, I agree it'd be nice to have better coverage for not only the Brewers, but I'm sure fans of other smaller markets would like the same. thebruce44...I'm not trying to attack you or anything like that. I'm just trying to somewhat portray the other side or what ESPN thinks. It's kind of like the Olympics showing figure skating all the time...there's plenty of people that don't like it that are real sports fans, but there is also a much larger part of the population that will watch figure skating almost every other thing.

 

And again, back to the topic of the thread ESPN has had some major sexual harassment issues in the past that may have internally be swept under the rug. My guess is they want to avoid those situations now and in the future.

[thebruce44]

It is interesting you bring up the NFL. I think that is not a fair comparison. Woodson also had ton of fanfare in college and was a very high draft pick in a sport where the draft is actually followed by many fans.

 

You just described Braun and to a lesser extent Prince (who had his name recognition), especially with all the fanfare on them in the minors (baseball's equivalent to college football). Players make the teams these days, especially those two.

 

I guess I just think that some people that bash ESPN have unreasonable expectations.

 

Realistic or not, I think its safe to say that a lot of viewers are flocking to the sport specific networks for nightly highlights and in depth analysis. Your opinion seems to be that ESPN does what they do for a reason and that is to satisfy as many viewers as possible. I think this is actually working against them right now and expect them to adapt to the changing landscape of information demands their viewers have. I think this process is being greatly slowed by their parent company.

 

You have your opinion which I can understand; others have their opinion which you don't understand. That’s fine if you don't want to get the other perspective, but I for one think its perfectly acceptable to rip ESPN as they are in a perfect position to deliver a lot of great content, yet aren't.

[BrewCrewForever]

Anyone else as upset as I am that Pascarelli got dumped from the Baseball Today podcast? He has good insight and he is hilarious. Love his style.

[JimH5]

Anyone else as upset as I am that Pascarelli got dumped from the Baseball Today podcast? He has good insight and he is hilarious. Love his style.

 

Agreed. I sent a note to the Ombudsman, which is apparently the only way they want to hear criticism. Pascarelli is great.

[JJHardy7]

You just described Braun and to a lesser extent Prince (who had his name recognition), especially with all the fanfare on them in the minors (baseball's equivalent to college football). Players make the teams these days, especially those two.

 

I think you are really underestimating pro football. This year's draft will be in prime time. The NFL and college football are two of the most popular sports. You can't say that about high school baseball, college baseball, or minor league baseball. As Brewers fans, we were all very excited and to a lesser extent nation wide. There just isn't a guarantee that putting up great numbers in the minors will mean anything in the majors. And I know the same can be true about football...it just covered a lot more than the little coverage that say college baseball has.

 

Realistic or not, I think its safe to say that a lot of viewers are flocking to the sport specific networks for nightly highlights and in depth analysis. Your opinion seems to be that ESPN does what they do for a reason and that is to satisfy as many viewers as possible. I think this is actually working against them right now and expect them to adapt to the changing landscape of information demands their viewers have. I think this process is being greatly slowed by their parent company.

 

Oh I agree. If you want the NFL, go to the NFL network. I'm not disagreeing. I would just ask...how would you realistically fix ESPN? I'm sure they have announcers that aren't that great or whatever so I don't know if that's an option. It seems like everyone that gets 'big' leaves or is asked to leave. I just think from a national view they do a decent job. And they do cover a lot of live sporting events which I do enjoy. I really don't care for some of the non-sports stuff they air, but they are trying to cover a huge and highly differentiated market. Like I said...for coverage like the Brewers there are a lot more options that are better than ESPN. For a high level national coverage, ESPN just isn't that bad IMO. It's not perfect, but I'd be interested in seeing some type of ratings for other pure sports channels...I think that would tell us what we need to know one way or another.

[thebruce44]

how would you realistically fix ESPN?

 

For Sportscenter I would cut out some of the fluff stories. I know they are going to have some, but they don't need to be nearly as long. There really isn't much to fixing it to be honest, just go back to what it was 10-15 years ago. News, highlights, a brief synopsis of the Sunday Conversation on Mondays, and end with Did You Know. That was good stuff. If you want to have interviews and such get away from the structure and product placement of The Coors Light or Bud Light 6 Pack of questions. Personally I don't think Sportscenter is really the time to be interviewing players, just stick to the news, highlights, and quotes from other interviews. Finally, never, never, never should an actor be interviewed. Do they think we don't realize Adam Sandler is in an upcoming movie owned by Disney? Just because the movie is sort of about football and has Michael Irving in it does not mean I want to watch a 10 minute commercial for it instead of highlights.

 

For the individual sports...for Football I think they have gone in the wrong direction in terms of announcers. I don't expect Berman to get let go or any of the other guys, but not much you can expect there. Judging by Fox's pregame show as well, the idiotic banter must draw in viewers. I am content to just listen to Jaws or Gruden talk about xs and os, but I fully admit that this probably doesn't sell. I don't really think much will change there or needs to change there.

 

For baseball, Steve Phillips' infidelity was actually fantastic for their network. Now if they can just get Joe Morgan to slip up with some interns we will be in business. These guys are lighting rods for criticism from knowledgeable fans. I recognize that it is going to be difficult to hire away someone who is very good as a GM or coach because in that case they will probably have a better offer from an MLB team, but there has to be something. Get a stathead sitting at the table with a retired catcher and a junk ball releaver who was was around the league for 20 years and let them talk. Finally, devote time to every team. In this day and age of fantasy baseball and increased access to info on the internet everyone wants to know everything. Baseball is going to keep becoming more like the NFL in that small market and large markets are going to matter less and less. Years ago all you could watch was the occasional Yankees game and of course the Cubs and Braves if you had cable. Now you can sign up for MLB.tv or Extra Innings. Fox shows a game each week. ESPN shows a ton of games. Sure the national stuff is still geared towards the larger markets, but if you want to watch Zach Greinkie's next start you can.

 

It isn't difficult for ESPN. Just look at what MLB network is doing and do that. You will reach more people because you have been around longer and have more lead ins. You don't have to beat them or yell out stupid nicknames for 30 minutes, just get back to basics.

 

Regardless, none of this is going to happen. This back and forth between us started because you stated that you didn't understand why people would bash ESPN. With every point I have made you seem to mostly agree. If thats the case, then why do you still think its unreasonable to poke fun at the network? If you don't like it I suggest you learn to ignore it since the ribbing isn't going away any time soon.

[JJHardy7]

I guess ESPN does have a channel like ESPNEWS if that is what you are looking for. I agree that some of the product placement stinks, but that is everywhere now unfortunately. I'm sure with all the coverage, personalities, and technological advancements ESPN has had it costs a lot more for them to operate. I don't like actors interviewed either...I guess it just comes with the territory and ESPN is a business.

 

Again, I just ask how does ESPN compare to the competition in terms of viewers? I'd guess it dominates and that is why it works the way it does. I don't mean to offend you or have this personal at all...I just think that most bf.netters (maybe all of them) are much more sophisticated than the average fan. We expect things to be better and such. And that's fine. I just think we might be in the minority when it comes to an 'average sports fan'. I told someone at work how bad ESPN botched the Ben Sheets leaving in free agency this year thing and they had no clue why that was a big deal. I had to explain that big screw up...and this is a person that I probably would define as an average or above average sports fan. ESPN no doubt has room to improve or change, but they are serving markets much bigger than Milwaukee.

[stalton]

I guess ESPN does have a channel like ESPNEWS if that is what you are looking for. I agree that some of the product placement stinks, but that is everywhere now unfortunately. I'm sure with all the coverage, personalities, and technological advancements ESPN has had it costs a lot more for them to operate. I don't like actors interviewed either...I guess it just comes with the territory and ESPN is a business.

 

Again, I just ask how does ESPN compare to the competition in terms of viewers? I'd guess it dominates and that is why it works the way it does. I don't mean to offend you or have this personal at all...I just think that most bf.netters (maybe all of them) are much more sophisticated than the average fan. We expect things to be better and such. And that's fine. I just think we might be in the minority when it comes to an 'average sports fan'. I told someone at work how bad ESPN botched the Ben Sheets leaving in free agency this year thing and they had no clue why that was a big deal. I had to explain that big screw up...and this is a person that I probably would define as an average or above average sports fan. ESPN no doubt has room to improve or change, but they are serving markets much bigger than Milwaukee.

Bolded for emphasis. I'd say not only does ESPN favor the East Coast, it favors the average sports fan. I think we BF'ers are in the double minority of being brewer fans and above average knowledgeable fans

[thebruce44]

I guess ESPN does have a channel like ESPNEWS if that is what you are looking for.

 

1 - I don't get that channel. 2 - The people I know who do get it, its not in HD.

 

Again, I just ask how does ESPN compare to the competition in terms of viewers? I'd guess it dominates and that is why it works the way it does.

 

I think judging based on number of viewers is a terrible way to estimate the quality of ESPNs broadcasting, which is really what we are talking about here. You seem to think ESPN has all the viewers they have because of their style of broadcasting and because they cater to the larger markets. I think they have all the viewers they have because they are ESPN and have been around forever. They are where the average sports fan goes for sports coverage and highlights because they don't know any better. Unlike you, I don't think this is at all an excuse for them to can get away with hour long commercials and crap reporting.

 

Maybe we have to just agree to disagree, but you are going to have to live with ESPN bashing on any messageboard like this and I think its understandable to expect something better from them.

[RobertR]

I have to say that I think Joe Morgan is among the least of ESPN's problems. Yeah, he's bad, but being a bad color commentator isn't the end of the world. Heck, you want bad commentary, see Dick Vitale at the NBA draft shows.

 

The screaming heads, corporate cross promoting, ignoring stories from smaller markets, rolling over whenever the leagues squawk, pushing catch phrases and personalities at the expense of reporting, rampant product placement, and general hypocrisy are ESPN's problems. Bob Ley's Outside the Lines is about the only thing with depth they have going for them outside of the events themselves.

 

Robert

[MJLiverock]

I guess ESPN does have a channel like ESPNEWS if that is what you are looking for.

 

1 - I don't get that channel. 2 - The people I know who do get it, its not in HD.

 

 

 

ESPNews is in HD on DirecTV, it is what I watch in place of SportsCenter. I used to watch SportsCenter everyday, and back in college multiple times a day. But since they went away from showing so many of the highlights and adding all the things mentioned like intereveiws, actors, fluff pieces I lost interest. When ESPNews went HD it became much better in terms of highlights and with the multiple news boxe on the sides and bottom, s a great way to catch information.

 

I think the only time I watch ESPN now is for live sporting events. I never liked any of the PTI, Around the Horn stuff and now the NFL and MLB network studio shows are so much better than the ESPN NFL/MLB shows that I really have no reason to watch ESPN for anything but the games.

[MarquesJohnson2000]

ESPNews is also in HD on Dish Network.

[thebruce44]

ESPNews is in HD on DirecTV, it is what I watch in place of SportsCenter. I used to watch SportsCenter everyday, and back in college multiple times a day. But since they went away from showing so many of the highlights and adding all the things mentioned like intereveiws, actors, fluff pieces I lost interest. When ESPNews went HD it became much better in terms of highlights and with the multiple news boxe on the sides and bottom, s a great way to catch information.

 

I think the only time I watch ESPN now is for live sporting events. I never liked any of the PTI, Around the Horn stuff and now the NFL and MLB network studio shows are so much better than the ESPN NFL/MLB shows that I really have no reason to watch ESPN for anything but the games.

And there is another perfect example of what I am talking about. Someone who used to enjoy SportsCenter/ESPN before it got Disneyed (Note: I actually love most Disney movies and don't hold anything against the company).

 

I guess I just don't see why its so hard to understand when people want to hold ESPN up to the higher standards they once set for themselves.

[dadofandrew]

Robert summed up their issues well, though as shorthand, allow me to say Stuart Scott. If I want to hear babble like that, I'll invite the slow kids in my son's 2nd grade class over for an evening.

 

What ails ESPN is the same thing that was wrong with CNN, and remains wrong with them...they suck. They would prefer telling a biased viewpoint because that's good for them...and the complete lack of real competition allows them to do so. There's a reason CNN is now at the bottom of the cable news ratings, as all the other networks suck far less.

 

I have little doubt if Versus or FSN would offer similar, highly promoted sports fare, they'd cut into the Sportscenter ratings...but that would take years and continued money spent on marketing and quality. It costs a lot to take on Goliath, and at present, no one has the guts to do so.

[jazzytrav]

Tony Kornheiser needs to be suspended for ruining my Monday Night Football experience. I don't understand how someone can know so little about sports and be a sports announcer.

 

As for the Hannah Storm thing...who cares how appropriate or inappropriate it really was? It was a stupid and insulting thing to say, regardless of whether it was deserved. It would be one thing to walk up to her and tell her what you think, or even to whisper it to someone else at the office. But you don't have to make her wardrode choice a topic on a radio show. Kornheiser is a bumbling idiot, so this doesn't surprise me.

[JJHardy7]

I think judging based on number of viewers is a terrible way to estimate the quality of ESPNs broadcasting, which is really what we are talking about here. You seem to think ESPN has all the viewers they have because of their style of broadcasting and because they cater to the larger markets. I think they have all the viewers they have because they are ESPN and have been around forever. They are where the average sports fan goes for sports coverage and highlights because they don't know any better. Unlike you, I don't think this is at all an excuse for them to can get away with hour long commercials and crap reporting.

 

Maybe we have to just agree to disagree, but you are going to have to live with ESPN bashing on any messageboard like this and I think its understandable to expect something better from them.

 

Oh we can agree to disagree. I respect your opinion and others that feel that way. I do think though that number of viewers is everything for ESPN. That is a big part of how they make money. That has been my point the whole time. If you take national sports channels (not sure how many of them there are) I'd expect that ESPN is a pretty significant leader. Again, that doesn't mean they do everything perfect or that I think it is the best thing to watch. They simply have a large market share. Maybe they've done research and have decided that having an actor on a week before a movie comes out helps ratings?

 

Again, I do agree with some of what you are saying. I just don't get too worked up about ESPN, their coverage, or constantly pointing out the negatives...it is a business. There are plenty of things they show that I watch that are live sporting events...I have complaints about the broadcasting and such, but imagine if ESPN just stopped tomorrow...we'd miss a lot of live sports. ESPN isn't a solution by any means for sports fans. It really is entertainment and it is what brings ESPN money. ESPN stands for Entertainment Sports Network.

 

And like I said...ESPNews is really kind of what SportsCenter used to be in some regard. It is unfortunate you don't receive it, but that doesn't mean they don't offer a product that might suit your needs or others needs. I don't mean to sound like a jerk...but again I'd like to see some market share/ratings data. If ESPN is kicking butt, why change to serve what is likely a minority of sports fans? I fall in that minority and it makes complete sense to me why they don't.

 

Like you said...we can agree to disagree. No problem. I'm just trying to point out what ESPN might be thinking....and my guess is they are rather successful at it. I will say though I'm not a fan of the Disney type stuff being involved on ESPN...but that is their call and I'm sure it makes financial sense.

[thebruce44]

I do think though that number of viewers is everything for ESPN. That is a big part of how they make money. That has been my point the whole time.

Sorry, but I feel like you are really not getting it here. Your point is that ESPN likes getting a lot of viewers because thats how they make money? I don't think that could be more obvious.

 

The debate I thought we were having was if ESPN bashing was justified and weather or not their programing has changed for the worse causing viewers to leave now that there are other options. I think most of the posters in this thread agree that this is the case and will continue to bash ESPN. I seriously doubt you are going to get anyone to debate with you if ESPN likes viewers and money or not.

[BrewCrewForever]

Wednesday was a new episode of Baseball Today and there is a new co-host it is Seth Everett. They finally mentioned Peter Pascarelli and that he was still with ESPN doing other things. My assumption is he is keeping his job doing various things for the Sunday Night Baseball radio broadcast as well as doing ESPN TV for various baseball events. Seth was okay on that first podcast, but still not the same without Peter and Eric doing the show.