ESPN

[retro44]

One of Disney’s most popular brands has investors really worried

 

[Stern]

The cord cutters have killed their business model and the chickens have come home to roost. Then you combine that with how they have mismanaged their own in house product of letting every talented person walk or they have either ran them off and it's a recipe for disaster.

Unless it's a game I don't watch that channel. I mean the channel is unwatchable. SportsCenter is just hosts who are wanna be comedians telling bad jokes over highlights of dunks and home runs. I don't even call them highlights anymore because they don't show you anything of importance and give you a feel of what happened. Then after those quick highlights they just plug their other programming the rest of the day. The show sucks. Then the rest of the day until the games start are shows where its contrived argument between talking heads where they just yell at each other and are fighting sides of points you know they don't truly believe.

It was reported yesterday they want to fire Lee Corso and replace him with Les Miles. I mean if they get rid of Lee Corso is there any reason to watch that Gameday show ever again? Corso is the show!! Sure he is old, had a stroke and has his bad days sometime and and will be gone someday and have to retire, but let the guy leave on his own terms. Don't kick him out the door for Les Miles of all people!

 

[OburgOrange]

The cord cutters have killed their business model and the chickens have come home to roost. Then you combine that with how they have mismanaged their own in house product of letting every talented person walk or they have either ran them off and it's a recipe for disaster.

Unless it's a game I don't watch that channel. I mean the channel is unwatchable. SportsCenter is just hosts who are wanna be comedians telling bad jokes over highlights of dunks and home runs. I don't even call them highlights anymore because they don't show you anything of importance and give you a feel of what happened. Then after those quick highlights they just plug their other programming the rest of the day. The show sucks. Then the rest of the day until the games start are shows where its contrived argument between talking heads where they just yell at each other and are fighting sides of points you know they don't truly believe.

It was reported yesterday they want to fire Lee Corso and replace him with Les Miles. I mean if they get rid of Lee Corso is there any reason to watch that Gameday show ever again? Corso is the show!! Sure he is old, had a stroke and has his bad days sometime and and will be gone someday and have to retire, but let the guy leave on his own terms. Don't kick him out the door for Les Miles of all people!

Totally agree. Unless it's a game I want to see, I don't watch at all

 

[texascpa]

The cord cutters have killed their business model and the chickens have come home to roost. Then you combine that with how they have mismanaged their own in house product of letting every talented person walk or they have either ran them off and it's a recipe for disaster.

Unless it's a game I don't watch that channel. I mean the channel is unwatchable. SportsCenter is just hosts who are wanna be comedians telling bad jokes over highlights of dunks and home runs. I don't even call them highlights anymore because they don't show you anything of importance and give you a feel of what happened. Then after those quick highlights they just plug their other programming the rest of the day. The show sucks. Then the rest of the day until the games start are shows where its contrived argument between talking heads where they just yell at each other and are fighting sides of points you know they don't truly believe.

It was reported yesterday they want to fire Lee Corso and replace him with Les Miles. I mean if they get rid of Lee Corso is there any reason to watch that Gameday show ever again? Corso is the show!! Sure he is old, had a stroke and has his bad days sometime and and will be gone someday and have to retire, but let the guy leave on his own terms. Don't kick him out the door for Les Miles of all people!

For the most part, I agree. Additionally, when they started focusing on social issues (started with Stuart Scott) and telling us how to think, that's when I stopped watching them. I don't watch sports and sports-related events for my social issues, I watch them to get a break from social issues. Now, it's "Who's LeBron voting for and why", "which athlete is kneeling for the National Anthem today", "which gay athlete was slighted", or my favorite "What are people tweeting today!". . I get enough of that in other places.

Okay, one other issue that I was thinking about yesterday. How does the ESPN3/WatchESPN viewer still suck! You can't resize the viewer unless you go to full-screen, you can't choose a resolution, you can fast-forward or rewind without the video glitching out and programming isn't always the easiest to find. It's been at least 5 years and I don't think they've updated it once, yet they're pushing more and more people to online viewing. C'mon ESPN put some money into this system and make it more friendly to your viewership!

 

[Symphony Steve]

Sportscenter in particular is an unwatchable mess. Don't know if they can fix it. Maybe the business model just doesn't work any more, and maybe there's not a model that will.

Kinda like newspapers.

 

[ThruWayWest]

Wildhack must have seen the writing on the wall and jumped to a safe landing space in CNY. Respect!

 

[UnknownOrange]

I'm 26 and I used to love watching the 11PM sportscenter 10 years ago. Think how far we've come since then. Twitter actually killed any sports highlight show you can think of. Why would I wait until 11PM when I can see a clip on twitter a moment after it happens?

 

[oldpinepoint]

Even the website is terrible. I used to watch hours of sports center but like others have said ESPN is unwatchable. watchESPn is pretty useless, half the time the games are blocked.

 

[Alsacs]

ESPN sucks outside of live games.
I used to watch PTI like 10 years ago.
The SportsCenter shows are AWFUL. ESPN used to have funny personalities like Dan Patrick/Keith Olbermann.
Now it's all cookie cutter corporate stooges. ESPN sucks the fun out of all their hosts except SVP and for that guy isn't worth watching.

Around the Horn should be used as a torture show down at Gitmo. As that show is so bad. I work so I can't watch the afternoon shows but they suck as well.

 

[TheCusian]

For the most part, I agree. Additionally, when they started focusing on social issues (started with Stuart Scott) and telling us how to think, that's when I stopped watching them. I don't watch sports and sports-related events for my social issues, I watch them to get a break from social issues. Now, it's "Who's LeBron voting for and why", "which athlete is kneeling for the National Anthem today", "which gay athlete was slighted", or my favorite "What are people tweeting today!". . I get enough of that in other places.

Okay, one other issue that I was thinking about yesterday. How does the ESPN3/WatchESPN viewer still suck! You can't resize the viewer unless you go to full-screen, you can't choose a resolution, you can fast-forward or rewind without the video glitching out and programming isn't always the easiest to find. It's been at least 5 years and I don't think they've updated it once, yet they're pushing more and more people to online viewing. C'mon ESPN put some money into this system and make it more friendly to your viewership!

There's a line there that shouldn't be crossed - but athletes are people who should use their influence to affect change. That's news that should be covered by ESPN.

 

[texascpa]

There's a line there that shouldn't be crossed - but athletes are people who should use their influence to affect change. That's news that should be covered by ESPN.

Sorry, don't care.

 

[Trueblue25]

I'm 26 and I used to love watching the 11PM sportscenter 10 years ago. Think how far we've come since then. Twitter actually killed any sports highlight show you can think of. Why would I wait until 11PM when I can see a clip on twitter a moment after it happens?

Absolutely agree.

 

[Alsacs]

There's a line there that shouldn't be crossed - but athletes are people who should use their influence to affect change. That's news that should be covered by ESPN.

ESPN only wants the change of the left that is their problem from their own ombudsman.
ESPN has turned off a lot of viewers on the right. I don't care if they are liberal but they are becoming MSNBC which has hurt their ratings.

Inside and out, ESPN dealing with changing political dynamics

 

[TheCusian]

Sorry, don't care.

That's a lot different than saying it's not worth covering.

 

[TheCusian]

ESPN only wants the change of the left that is their problem from their own ombudsman.
ESPN has turned off a lot of viewers on the right. I don't care if they are liberal but they are becoming MSNBC which has hurt their ratings.

Inside and out, ESPN dealing with changing political dynamics

No - they cover athletes (and by way of TV contracts, pay) that may have a lot to say. Defining "Right or Left" is a way of ignoring problems or stories that are hard to deal with. So we put them in a "partisan news box" so they are easier to ignore. What makes an issue a partisan one?

(Not you specifically Alsacs) But if we follow a sport where a majority of the athletes are African Americans - and then say "their issues are not my issues" because of politics, then I'd suggest we need to be very careful of not being a part of the problem.

 

[texascpa]

That's a lot different than saying it's not worth covering.

It's not worth covering, if they want to keep my viewership. That's the point, they've decided to dive deep into the social issues muck, and because of that, they are losing viewership, I don't care what Skipper says (see Alsacs link). ESPN was synonymous for sports. Over the years, it's moved closer and closer to the MTV format - no videos, all reality tv.

 

[orange44]

ESPN only wants the change of the left that is their problem from their own ombudsman.
ESPN has turned off a lot of viewers on the right. I don't care if they are liberal but they are becoming MSNBC which has hurt their ratings.

Inside and out, ESPN dealing with changing political dynamics

Agree!

 

[TheCusian]

It's not worth covering, if they want to keep my viewership. That's the point, they've decided to dive deep into the social issues muck, and because of that, they are losing viewership, I don't care what Skipper says (see Alsacs link). ESPN was synonymous for sports. Over the years, it's moved closer and closer to the MTV format - no videos, all reality tv.

I think that's a fair request... But do you think that the story in the stadium should always trump the stories outside of it? Like "Just give me the score, I don't care that Dwayne Wade's family member was shot?" or the politically benign "James Connor battled back from cancer ... is not important, can he score a TD vs Clemson?"

My point is that it's wishful thinking to separate the two (real world, sports world).

I also don't care to see things are "right or left" or "too political" - to me - that's weak sauce. "Is it important to the story?" is the line.

 

[Chip]

The SportsCenter shows are AWFUL. ESPN used to have funny personalities like Dan Patrick/Keith Olbermann.

I like to watch Cari Champion when I go to the gym during lunch. She inspires me to work harder while I'm there.

Other than that, yeah, I never watch.

 

[Eric15]

But if we follow a sport where a majority of the athletes are African Americans - and then say "their issues are not my issues" because of politics, then I'd suggest we need to be very careful of not being a part of the problem.

Well said.

 

[Jeremy L.]

Another reason ESPN has lost a lot of viewers is because of the major sports networks that have come up. ESPN doesn't do much hockey talk besides highlights and the playoffs. Why would an NHL fan watch Sportscenter/ESPN for 5 minutes of NHL highlights when they can watch the NHL Network and get 24/7 hockey coverage? Same goes with the NBA, MLB and NFL.

 

[Fly Rodder]

It's not worth covering, if they want to keep my viewership. That's the point, they've decided to dive deep into the social issues muck, and because of that, they are losing viewership, I don't care what Skipper says (see Alsacs link). ESPN was synonymous for sports. Over the years, it's moved closer and closer to the MTV format - no videos, all reality tv.

I agree with some, but not all. ESPN has gone to crap as a result of the format changes. What used to be niche channel that showed logrolling at 2am and a few different games turned into a property where they make their own shows and try to make people like them. I will never enjoy watching or listening to Stephen A. Smith or Skip Bayless. It's cheaper to self-produce content than acquire the rights to it. And "reality TV" including the format of 2 ex-coaches, 2 ex-players, and a TV person yelling at each other is the cheapest. All cable channels have done some variation of it to this point. If these train wrecks didn't generate cost-effective ratings, they wouldn't be doing it.

That said, it is a news organization in some sense and they can't shy away from covering news in the sports industry. Being an inclusive company that represents the view of all people who participate in sports is their stated position. They can't just ignore some issues because they may be icky or problematic to someone. African Americans in professional sports used to be a taboo topic, too. Should they ignore the special olympics because it's too touchy feely? the make-a-wish kid who gets to visit his favorite team and make a basket/score a goal/catch a pass? the first openly gay/bi/etc athlete? The kid throwing out the first pitch to his veteran father/mother? Where's your line? None of it? All of it? They can't pick and choose what they're showing. If they're showing Americans, they're going to be showing something that someone doesn't agree with. Thinigs being apolitical is a ficitioous thing. People think that scientific peer review is biased, you think your sporting coverage is going to ignore something because it might offend someone?

They're losing subscribers because people are cutting cable to get away from overpriced channel bundles and ESPN has long overemphasized their own properties instead of sporting events.

Their website sucks, too.

 

[NashvilleOrange]

I wish the ACC wasn't completely hitched to ESPN because it does seem like a sinking ship. Getting score notifications on my phone has kind of ruined Sportscenter. I used to wake up early, not knowing all of the previous days results and enjoy watching them tell a condensed story of each of the previous day's games. 30 for 30s are cool though, that's one of the few cool things they've done over the last decade.

 

[Hoo's That]

I need an explanation of "cord cutting". The only thing I understand about it is that you're not getting the games via Comcast, FiOS, Time-Warner, etc., because you're no longer their customer. Now here's where I lose understanding of what's going on. To watch the games that only appear on one of the ESPNs you have to get Roku, etc., plugged into your TV via some port on the back of the TV. My understanding is that Roku, etc., are not free. If they're allowed to transfer ESPN's games to your TV don't they have to pay a fee to ESPN? Everyone says "ESPN is losing subscribers." Are they really losing them if everyone who has one of those devices gets ESPN? Or is the point that they don't get as much money from Roku, etc., that they did from Comcast, FiOS, and Time-Warner, etc.? Ms. Hoo's That wants to end our cable subscriptions, but she also fully understands that I have to have the ESPNs and Comcast SportsNet (our RSN for the ACC games). If we do that am I no longer a subscriber to the ESPNs and CSN even though I'm getting their content coming into my TV through a different port?

 

[TheCusian]

I need an explanation of "cord cutting". The only thing I understand about it is that you're not getting the games via Comcast, FiOS, Time-Warner, etc., because you're no longer their customer. Now here's where I lose understanding of what's going on. To watch the games that only appear on one of the ESPNs you have to get Roku, etc., plugged into your TV via some port on the back of the TV. My understanding is that Roku, etc., are not free. If they're allowed to transfer ESPN's games to your TV don't they have to pay a fee to ESPN? Everyone says "ESPN is losing subscribers." Are they really losing them if everyone who has one of those devices gets ESPN? Or is the point that they don't get as much money from Roku, etc., that they did from Comcast, FiOS, and Time-Warner, etc.? Ms. Hoo's That wants to end our cable subscriptions, but she also fully understands that I have to have the ESPNs and Comcast SportsNet (our RSN for the ACC games). If we do that am I no longer a subscriber to the ESPNs and CSN even though I'm getting their content coming into my TV through a different port?

Bundles.

It used to be everyone way paying for ESPN (even Grandma) regardless if it's being watched on the regular. Streaming has disrupted that $ and it's looking to get worse. So - they still get money from people who are using non-cable options (I use SlingTV) - but not in the same volume of people.

I think the demise is that and only that. The bread and butter of ESPN has always been the games. If they keep buying games people will watch. They want people to watch Sportscenter, First Take, etc. as that's more ad revenue - but that stuff is fixable. If you're making less money you need to adjust. That's all that's happening, IMHO.