Posted:
#26
Amen mugg
I also forgot ESPN selling its soul by promoting WWE all over its site and networks
Is ESPN on it's last legs?
Posted:
#28
Quote Originally Posted by packers1992:
ESPN has done over the last few years a lot of things that have hurt their bottom line and i'll name a few
1. Overspent for NFL and NBA coverage
ESPN pays 1.1 Billion for the MNF package. A package where they don't get to flex games out. And when they moved MNF to ESPN in 2006 the NFL basically said they didn't care about MNF as they were going to make Sunday Night Football on NBC the game of the week. And in the new ESPN NFL deal they get a playoff game wildcard weekend... The worst one
Same in the NBA though basically every network overspent on the NBA and that's why the Salary Cap is skyrocketing in the NBA
2. Too much NFL coverage
The reasoning the NFL had for Thursday Night football was they needed it to save the NFL Network. My response then was you don't need the NFL Network....Because ESPN IS the NFL Network. Not everything that happens in the NFL is that important and what hurts in that mark for ESPN is the NFL ratings are down and i think will continue to drop
3. They can say what they want but they're political
ESPN made this choice a long time ago which has hurt them with conservatives and with just average people who want to watch the game. Whether it be the town halls about black issues/them supporting Black Lives Matter. To the nonstop talking about Kaepernick and his BS from last year to the Caitlyn Jenner mess. ESPN has really gone like one write said to appealing to the liberal fringe on social media and in the process turned the rest of the country off
2 issues in my view hurt ESPN the most. We all remember a couple years ago the Michael Sam situation where he came out and the majority of us said "Good for you I guys GL to you and make us some money" The majority of people didn't give 2 bleeps and a holler about Michael Sam's sexual preference. ESPN went on and on and on and on about it which led to the draft where he got picked and he kissed his boyfriend
The reason I think the kiss between Sam and his BF bothered me and others was it looked staged. I remember someone here pointing that out when it happened and you had the ridiculousness of them feeding each other wedding cake which was dumb. It seemed like an ESPN publicity stunt. And then we he got to training camp with the Rams you had that reporter discuss Sam's showering habits. I mean WTF is that? What do you think he's going to do in the shower? Did you think he'd look at Sam Bradford and be like Hey Bradford your penis looks like a penis except its smaller
The 2nd issue which hurt ESPN with me was all throughout the CFB season LY every Saturday a game on ESPN or ESPN2 would go to commercial and you'd see a Hillary Clinton Stronger together ad. Now I realize some of you would say "packers you supported and voted for Trump so of course you hated Hillary ads and if they were Trump ads you would've said nothing" and you'd be wrong. I think the majority of us watch and bet sports...To get away from the BS in politics and the world. I don't believe political ads belong on a sports network
Just my 2 cents guys and I don't think ESPN can recover from the mess they've made over the last number of years
Well put Pack.
Posted:
#29
ESPN had a monopoly on sports for about 20 years but that is gone.
There are a lot of sports on TV these days, and a lot of sports-only channels. If you are an NBA fan, you don't need ESPN you can watch NBA TV and get better coverage. Same goes for MLB, NHL and NFL. Diehard fans can buy the MLB package and then will probably never watch a game on ESPN because of the extra commercials. Casual fans can watch the highlights on their phone or computer and don't need ESPN either...
That leaves live college sports, and nowadays there are 15+ college games on at any given time.
Another problem is millenials and streaming. Used to be there were a ton of 20 year olds that all they did was watch ESPN Sportscenter. Now a lot of them live with their parents, and the ones that don't probably use their parent's cable account password to stream games.
And cable TV didn't used to be so expensive...
Posted:
#30
Quote Originally Posted by thorpe:
ESPN had a monopoly on sports for about 20 years but that is gone.
Competition & evolution were inevitable. Much like a "sports only" station was considered a pipe dream my many, so was a "baseball only" or "golf only" channel.......& every one of those has taken a bite out of ESPN. Even the "Red zone" has filled a niche. I watch more of that on Sunday's than any one game, simply because of too many commercials on networks. ESPN had a monopoly on sports for about 20 years but that is gone.
There are a lot of sports on TV these days, and a lot of sports-only channels. If you are an NBA fan, you don't need ESPN you can watch NBA TV and get better coverage. Same goes for MLB, NHL and NFL. Diehard fans can buy the MLB package and then will probably never watch a game on ESPN because of the extra commercials. Casual fans can watch the highlights on their phone or computer and don't need ESPN either...
That leaves live college sports, and nowadays there are 15+ college games on at any given time.
Another problem is millenials and streaming. Used to be there were a ton of 20 year olds that all they did was watch ESPN Sportscenter. Now a lot of them live with their parents, and the ones that don't probably use their parent's cable account password to stream games.
And cable TV didn't used to be so expensive...
Posted:
#35
I tried to watch ESPN for the first time in about 5 years last week. The first show I had the pleasure of watching was SportsNation. I'm 30 years old and this felt like a show I would of watched when I was 9. This show seemed like a sports version of America's Funniest home videos. Cheesy and fatuous.
Next up was Highly Questionable. This show consists of more "funny" videos with an old man in the middle who likes to show his stomach a lot. There was about 1 minute of commentary on sports. Who is this show for?
Afterwards was the terrible back to back programs of Around the Horn and PTI. Around the Horn is a game show for some reason. I would rather just have these people sit around a table like PTI and discuss the popular topics of the day. Annoying newspaper columnists fill this show. PTI has not innovated at all since it began. Tony Kornheiser isn't funny and Mike Wilbon has really bad takes.
I ended up skipping the afternoon SportsCenter and checking out the night one with Scott Van Pelt. Van Pelt is actually really good. He has a charming quality to him that was welcoming after the afternoon shows that I watched. The show was basically filled with a bunch of guests and analysts talking about basketball for an hour. If the show was just Van Pelt commenting it would be great, but that wasn't how it went.
In conclusion, ESPN is for 7 year olds. They have some really good talent but it all gets overshadowed by the nonsense they are forced to talk about. Thankfully the internet exists.
Posted:
#36
For those who like to cook will know and understand that ESPN is not as half as bad as what The Food Network has become. UGH!
There's not 1 show about cooking; all retard competition based shows. Terrible.
Back on point, PTI isn't too bad compared to the others. Cream, Good thing you skipped that 6pm SC with Michael and Jemelle. It's horrible. Disney is really forcing Diversity down our throats.
Disney's ABC does it with Modern Family (Married, guy Couple), Fresh Off the Boat (Asian family) and Blackish (Speaks for itself).
The they attempt to give da White Mans some action with Tim Allen's Last Man Standing (I actually really like this one). Like South Park, I'm all about a show that rags on Liberals. It's the stupid phuckin PC culture that we live in.
Posted:
#37
Quote Originally Posted by THEMUGG:
. Even the "Red zone" has filled a niche. I watch more of that on Sunday's than any one game, simply because of too many commercials on networks.
. Even the "Red zone" has filled a niche. I watch more of that on Sunday's than any one game, simply because of too many commercials on networks.
I think RedZone has ruined the primetime games for a lot of people. After watching RedZone for 7 hours with no commercials, the nonstop commercials in the primetime games is extra annoying.
Posted:
#38
ESPN is in reality ABC News/ Disney.In regards to On-Air talent (TV and Radio) the truly endangered species is White,Straight,Male over 35. On the radio side if you hear a new White Guy I just figure he's g@y. On ESPN Radio, on Sat. afternoon if they aren't running a game they give the Network over to 3 women(1 I'm sure is Hetero but she's Outnumbered) who talk about Female Problems.
All it has become to me is a PC sportsticker on Mute that better get the scores right or it has lost any value.
Posted:
#39
Quote Originally Posted by thorpe:
It has for me. Thank god for DVR's. I can start watching a game one hour into it & buzz through all the commercials. Perhaps it's just a matter of time before sponsors figure out that no one is paying attention to their ads during NFL games & pulls them. Maybe the NFL will learn something from this. More likely they'll figure a way to quash the Red Zone. I think RedZone has ruined the primetime games for a lot of people. After watching RedZone for 7 hours with no commercials, the nonstop commercials in the primetime games is extra annoying.
Posted:
#40
$7 a month from every satellite or cable customer in the country is what ESPN steals from the public. They lost 600K subscribers in one month. I'm thrilled that gravy train is coming to a halt. It's the only way they can over pay for the major sports leagues. Cable & Satellite tv will become the new record store before long with all the options available to watch tv for $30 a month instead of $200 due to the Socialism/theft from cable & satellite co's. DirecTv should burn in he!! for what they charge.
Posted:
#44
Quote Originally Posted by ArtSchlichterJr:
For all us "old school" people ESPN was a small miracle !! Most of you young guys don't realize the only sports news on TV was 3 minutes on your local news before ESPN news.. At the start it was the same taped sports news all day long on tape with no update and cheer leading competition was a huge part of the TV time . But with that said they will always hold a special place in my heart for bringing sport new's to the all of us all day long.. Thanks for the memories ESPN you changed the game for sports news and paved the way for all the copy cat's.. At the end of the day all the detractor's today also owe you a tip of the hat.!! GL ESPN you were the Wright Brothers of sports TV there is no runner up in this space. Wishing you all the best for bringing sports coverage into my life .. We went from 3 minutes a day to 24 hrs ......
ESPN is like the Willie May's of baseball.. Willie played to many years at the end but when he retired he was still freaking WILLIE MAY's a superstar much like ESPN will always be to anyone over 50.. For all us "old school" people ESPN was a small miracle !! Most of you young guys don't realize the only sports news on TV was 3 minutes on your local news before ESPN news.. At the start it was the same taped sports news all day long on tape with no update and cheer leading competition was a huge part of the TV time . But with that said they will always hold a special place in my heart for bringing sport new's to the all of us all day long.. Thanks for the memories ESPN you changed the game for sports news and paved the way for all the copy cat's.. At the end of the day all the detractor's today also owe you a tip of the hat.!! GL ESPN you were the Wright Brothers of sports TV there is no runner up in this space. Wishing you all the best for bringing sports coverage into my life .. We went from 3 minutes a day to 24 hrs ...
... Be careful with the axe Eugene.
Posted:
#47
Quote Originally Posted by Slobbasaurus:
They're a laggard on Disney's Balance Sheet. They have been losing money for some time now.
They're a laggard on Disney's Balance Sheet. They have been losing money for some time now.
WRONG!
This goomba doesn't know what he is talking about. Disney bought ESPN to be it's cash cow. However, that transaction coincided with unprecedented "unplugging" as people canceled their cable TV. ESPN doesn't release their official figures, but they only profited about $1 billion last year. I know that sounds huge to you and me, but Disney's investors need that profit to be $3-$4 billion to make that transaction worthwhile. This is a case of the "franchise player" only scoring about 1/4th of what the team (Disney) hoped they'd score.
I hate most ESPN TV, except for their live games. Their online content is still strong, however.
Posted:
#48
Quote Originally Posted by Sidehatch:
WRONG!
This goomba doesn't know what he is talking about. Disney bought ESPN to be it's cash cow. However, that transaction coincided with unprecedented "unplugging" as people canceled their cable TV. ESPN doesn't release their official figures, but they only profited about $1 billion last year. I know that sounds huge to you and me, but Disney's investors need that profit to be $3-$4 billion to make that transaction worthwhile. This is a case of the "franchise player" only scoring about 1/4th of what the team (Disney) hoped they'd score.
I hate most ESPN TV, except for their live games. Their online content is still strong, however.
Gomba! Hahahahaha
I resent that coming from a White Guilt Liberal! That was very hurtful.
Where are you getting this 2016 $1 Billion profit from? Cite your source because anyone can make up these ridiculous figures.
Pulling numbers out of your @ss it seems. I may be wrong but please cite your sources on this.
Otherwise, you come across as a pretentious douche, which is actually kind of suiting for a Liberal. BTW, BigVern owned you in his Election thread. Foot in Mouth as he called it months before he was elected.
That one is Archive material.
Posted:
#49
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:
Quote Originally Posted by THEMUGG:
16. Derek Tyson? — SEC recruiting analyst Only "recruiting analyst" to lose his job......at least so far. Why would espn employ a recruiting analyst?
As I was flipping channels the other day, I come across the big annual draft hype on ESPN. You know the one. Where they micro-analyze the color of the players sh*t, and say that one guy is going to do better than another because he can bench 5 lbs more. It is literally a joke that they spend months on scouting, but basically zero time on game and time management - the stuff that really wins games - but I digress......ESPN has 2 - yes 2 - draft experts. This douche Mel Kyper and this other younger douche Todd McShay.100-1 says one or both get the boot right after the draft.16. Derek Tyson? — SEC recruiting analyst Only "recruiting analyst" to lose his job......at least so far. Why would espn employ a recruiting analyst?
Game and time management! Finally someone who recognizes..
Posted:
#50
Quote Originally Posted by Slobbasaurus:
Gomba! Hahahahaha
I resent that coming from a White Guilt Liberal! That was very hurtful.
Where are you getting this 2016 $1 Billion profit from? Cite your source because anyone can make up these ridiculous figures.
Pulling numbers out of your @ss it seems. I may be wrong but please cite your sources on this.
Otherwise, you come across as a pretentious douche, which is actually kind of suiting for a Liberal. BTW, BigVern owned you in his Election thread. Foot in Mouth as he called it months before he was elected.
That one is Archive material.
Source: estimates based on the numbers found here. With $9 billion in revenue in 2017, and 7.2 billion in TV rights, plus an other $800 million in operating costs, one arrives at the 2017 estimate of $1 billion. Why is 2017 more important? Because it anticipates MORE lost subscribers than 2016. Therefore, $1 billion in profit is a conservative estimate for 2016.
https://www.outkickthecoverage.com/espn-loses-621-000-subscribers-worst-month-in-company-history-102916
If you're talking about Big Vern's election thread, I never said Trump wouldn't win; I said a vote for Trump is a dumb vote because he doesn't understand the following important things:
- How nuclear weapons are deployed (proven by his erroneous debate answer)
- The constitutional protections of religious freedom, despite 240 years of law from the US Supreme Court (proven by the repeated overturning of his executive orders)
- How to run a casino in a profitable manner (all of his have failed)
- Basic trade deals and tariffs (proven by his promise to overturn NAFTA, only to flip flop on it last week)
- How legal pleadings work
- Why selling out to Russia is bad public policy (evidenced by the bombing of little children with chemical weapons that were sold to Syria by Russia, Russia's backing of North Korea, and Russia's backing of Iran)
Vern's biggest arguments were:
- NAFTA is bad
- Understanding of legal pleadings is "semantics"
- Trump can work better with Russia than others
- Trumps casino ventures were intentional failures
- Only the military knows how nuclear weapons are deployed
Those who voted for Trump are now going to see a halfarse tax plan. His was 250-words of bullet points. Reagan's was 500+ pages with annotations.
If Trump's proposal holds true, my taxes will go up about 250% thanks to his proposal to eliminate credits for state taxes, and the elimination of the mortgage interest credit. The increased standard deduction doesn't do much for me when you take away the other two things.
Did I mention that Wall Street expects a 7% decrease in home values due to the elimination of the mortgage interest credit?
Did I also mention that Wall Street readily acknowledges higher consumer costs for each trade war started by Trump?
Fortunately, Trump has been incompetent so far. Hopefully for the average citizen's wallet, he continues to be incompetent.
Hot Forum Topics
