"ESPN averaged 1.3 million viewers in primetime during Q2, down 32% from the same period last year and the lowest primetime audience for the net in at least seven years. The 32% drop was the biggest decline among cable sports networks."

http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/I...rship.aspx

ESPN might have their work cut out for them with NBC Sports and now Fox Sports1 on the rise.

BTW, how does the Speed Channel get such good ratings already and it is not even FS1 yet? Im also surprised how bad ESPNU is.

.

Fine by me. I continue to root for ESPN's decline.

ESPN really pushed a variety of unqualified personalities on us across the spectrum of their broadcasts and nothing is more off putting than to have many of these individuals trying to create news rather than reporting it, reporting it with obvious lack of understanding of the nuances of the games they are covering, and then politicizing the danged sports.

Nothing has offended me more than their push of who we are to reflect upon for the Heisman before the season is even a month away. I just wish they would show me the sports, give me the play by play, and then shut up and show me the scores on the ticker and the highlights on the tube. It really isn't that hard to do. And, I'm sick of talking heads over-talking one another on phony sports shows arguing points that nobody cares about.

I go to sports to get away from the View, Political Debate Shows, and Bloomberg's Self Promoting Discussions about Business. I watch sports because someone wins and someone loses and then it's over. I don't tune in to listen to two people I don't care about arguing about the game I just watched and telling me what to think about it. I can't think of anything more insulting for a broadcast team, or analysts to do. If ESPN is declining it is because of these things, not the games they put on, or even their competition, .....yet.

I'd kind of venture a guess a part of the decline was the weakest NFL draft in a long time and probably as well fewer NBA Playoff games. `They mention in the article- last year had 7 game NBA series with Heat/Celtics, this year they got 4 game sweep with Spurs/Grizzlies. Also only had 17 playoff games this year for NBA which seems awfully low quite frankly. Also, last year they had the US Open golf in San Francisco, so prime time coverage for 2 nights which gets good ratings- this year-not the case. Last year was abnormally high as you can see in their chart- highest by a good 14% margin.

I really don't see ESPN worried too much about this.

(07-15-2013 10:38 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I'd kind of venture a guess a part of the decline was the weakest NFL draft in a long time and probably as well fewer NBA Playoff games. `They mention in the article- last year had 7 game NBA series with Heat/Celtics, this year they got 4 game sweep with Spurs/Grizzlies. Also only had 17 playoff games this year for NBA which seems awfully low quite frankly. Also, last year they had the US Open golf in San Francisco, so prime time coverage for 2 nights which gets good ratings- this year-not the case. Last year was abnormally high as you can see in their chart- highest by a good 14% margin.

I really don't see ESPN worried too much about this.

You could add a less than stellar College World Series.

(07-15-2013 10:26 PM)JRsec Wrote:  ESPN really pushed a variety of unqualified personalities on us across the spectrum of their broadcasts and nothing is more off putting than to have many of these individuals trying to create news rather than reporting it, reporting it with obvious lack of understanding of the nuances of the games they are covering, and then politicizing the danged sports.

Nothing has offended me more than their push of who we are to reflect upon for the Heisman before the season is even a month away. I just wish they would show me the sports, give me the play by play, and then shut up and show me the scores on the ticker and the highlights on the tube. It really isn't that hard to do. And, I'm sick of talking heads over-talking one another on phony sports shows arguing points that nobody cares about.

I go to sports to get away from the View, Political Debate Shows, and Bloomberg's Self Promoting Discussions about Business. I watch sports because someone wins and someone loses and then it's over. I don't tune in to listen to two people I don't care about arguing about the game I just watched and telling me what to think about it. I can't think of anything more insulting for a broadcast team, or analysts to do. If ESPN is declining it is because of these things, not the games they put on, or even their competition, .....yet.

I agree with a lot of these viewpoints from a personal standpoint. However, the ESPN ratings decline has a pretty straightforward explanation: they only had 2 NBA playoff games involving either the Lakers or Heat this year and a 4-game sweep in the Western Conference Finals featuring small markets, whereas it had around 11 Heat or Lakers playoff games last year along with a 7-game Eastern Conference Finals between the Heat and Celtics that drove the network to record ratings. Those NBA games were among the highest rated programs on ESPN of the year outside of NFL Football and the college football National Championship Game and Rose Bowl, so the lower wattage NBA games this year had a huge impact on the quarterly ratings (effectively having 10% of their evenings in the quarter switching from top tier ratings to filler compared to last year). Note that TNT, which got the benefit of a great 7-game Eastern Conference Finals featuring the Heat this year, received boffo ratings. NBC Sports Network effectively had the NHL equivalent this year of what ESPN had with the NBA last year, which was having large market teams in Chicago and Boston getting all the way to the Stanley Cup Finals, so that's the reason for their rise. The bottom line is that sexy matchups with marquee teams will draw viewers regardless of the quality of the announcers or pundits (whereas the best announcers in the world won't draw flies to a bad matchup).

Unfortunately, the ratings actually continue to show that we're a very vocal minority in terms of complaining about ESPN's pundit shows, as those have drawn much better audiences than the higher quality shows like Outside the Lines. To put the total day viewership numbers into perspective, ESPN still has more daily viewers than every other sports network combined.

(07-15-2013 10:49 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(07-15-2013 10:26 PM)JRsec Wrote:  ESPN really pushed a variety of unqualified personalities on us across the spectrum of their broadcasts and nothing is more off putting than to have many of these individuals trying to create news rather than reporting it, reporting it with obvious lack of understanding of the nuances of the games they are covering, and then politicizing the danged sports.

Nothing has offended me more than their push of who we are to reflect upon for the Heisman before the season is even a month away. I just wish they would show me the sports, give me the play by play, and then shut up and show me the scores on the ticker and the highlights on the tube. It really isn't that hard to do. And, I'm sick of talking heads over-talking one another on phony sports shows arguing points that nobody cares about.

I go to sports to get away from the View, Political Debate Shows, and Bloomberg's Self Promoting Discussions about Business. I watch sports because someone wins and someone loses and then it's over. I don't tune in to listen to two people I don't care about arguing about the game I just watched and telling me what to think about it. I can't think of anything more insulting for a broadcast team, or analysts to do. If ESPN is declining it is because of these things, not the games they put on, or even their competition, .....yet.

I agree with a lot of these viewpoints from a personal standpoint. However, the ESPN ratings decline has a pretty straightforward explanation: they only had 2 NBA playoff games involving either the Lakers or Heat this year and a 4-game sweep in the Western Conference Finals featuring small markets, whereas it had around 11 Heat or Lakers playoff games last year along with a 7-game Eastern Conference Finals between the Heat and Celtics that drove the network to record ratings. Those NBA games were among the highest rated programs on ESPN of the year outside of NFL Football and the college football National Championship Game and Rose Bowl, so the lower wattage NBA games this year had a huge impact on the quarterly ratings (effectively having 10% of their evenings in the quarter switching from top tier ratings to filler compared to last year). Note that TNT, which got the benefit of a great 7-game Eastern Conference Finals featuring the Heat this year, received boffo ratings. NBC Sports Network effectively had the NHL equivalent this year of what ESPN had with the NBA last year, which was having large market teams in Chicago and Boston getting all the way to the Stanley Cup Finals, so that's the reason for their rise. The bottom line is that sexy matchups with marquee teams will draw viewers regardless of the quality of the announcers or pundits (whereas the best announcers in the world won't draw flies to a bad matchup).

Unfortunately, the ratings actually continue to show that we're a very vocal minority in terms of complaining about ESPN's pundit shows, as those have drawn much better audiences than the higher quality shows like Outside the Lines. To put the total day viewership numbers into perspective, ESPN still has more daily viewers than every other sports network combined.

I understand the facts Frank, but I've been waiting a long time to register one old man's dislike for the direction of sports broadcasting. I know I'm a statistical aberration but I am glad that I lived in the age of Curt Gowdy and Pee Wee Reese, Howard Cosell and Dandy Don Meredith, John Madden who was a breath of fresh air when he retired from coaching, and in the early days of ESPN Bob Ley.

I choose to believe that if I am in the minority on this with you then that is further proof that "Idiocracy" has come to fruition.

(07-15-2013 10:40 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-15-2013 10:38 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I'd kind of venture a guess a part of the decline was the weakest NFL draft in a long time and probably as well fewer NBA Playoff games. `They mention in the article- last year had 7 game NBA series with Heat/Celtics, this year they got 4 game sweep with Spurs/Grizzlies. Also only had 17 playoff games this year for NBA which seems awfully low quite frankly. Also, last year they had the US Open golf in San Francisco, so prime time coverage for 2 nights which gets good ratings- this year-not the case. Last year was abnormally high as you can see in their chart- highest by a good 14% margin.

I really don't see ESPN worried too much about this.

You could add a less than stellar College World Series.

Or maybe the Nielsen research reported by WSJ is correct and only 4% of Americans watch sports other than the NFL on a regular basis.
1.3 million represents about 1% of TV households and about 1.4% of all people who can see ESPN.

To get much over that threshold you've got to have a big compelling event those have been in short supply for ESPN since the BCS title game.

(07-15-2013 10:26 PM)JRsec Wrote:  ESPN really pushed a variety of unqualified personalities on us across the spectrum of their broadcasts and nothing is more off putting than to have many of these individuals trying to create news rather than reporting it, reporting it with obvious lack of understanding of the nuances of the games they are covering, and then politicizing the danged sports.

Nothing has offended me more than their push of who we are to reflect upon for the Heisman before the season is even a month away. I just wish they would show me the sports, give me the play by play, and then shut up and show me the scores on the ticker and the highlights on the tube. It really isn't that hard to do. And, I'm sick of talking heads over-talking one another on phony sports shows arguing points that nobody cares about.

I go to sports to get away from the View, Political Debate Shows, and Bloomberg's Self Promoting Discussions about Business. I watch sports because someone wins and someone loses and then it's over. I don't tune in to listen to two people I don't care about arguing about the game I just watched and telling me what to think about it. I can't think of anything more insulting for a broadcast team, or analysts to do. If ESPN is declining it is because of these things, not the games they put on, or even their competition, .....yet.

BOLD: amen
UNDERLINED: AMEN!

(07-15-2013 11:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-15-2013 10:49 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(07-15-2013 10:26 PM)JRsec Wrote:  ESPN really pushed a variety of unqualified personalities on us across the spectrum of their broadcasts and nothing is more off putting than to have many of these individuals trying to create news rather than reporting it, reporting it with obvious lack of understanding of the nuances of the games they are covering, and then politicizing the danged sports.

Nothing has offended me more than their push of who we are to reflect upon for the Heisman before the season is even a month away. I just wish they would show me the sports, give me the play by play, and then shut up and show me the scores on the ticker and the highlights on the tube. It really isn't that hard to do. And, I'm sick of talking heads over-talking one another on phony sports shows arguing points that nobody cares about.

I go to sports to get away from the View, Political Debate Shows, and Bloomberg's Self Promoting Discussions about Business. I watch sports because someone wins and someone loses and then it's over. I don't tune in to listen to two people I don't care about arguing about the game I just watched and telling me what to think about it. I can't think of anything more insulting for a broadcast team, or analysts to do. If ESPN is declining it is because of these things, not the games they put on, or even their competition, .....yet.

I agree with a lot of these viewpoints from a personal standpoint. However, the ESPN ratings decline has a pretty straightforward explanation: they only had 2 NBA playoff games involving either the Lakers or Heat this year and a 4-game sweep in the Western Conference Finals featuring small markets, whereas it had around 11 Heat or Lakers playoff games last year along with a 7-game Eastern Conference Finals between the Heat and Celtics that drove the network to record ratings. Those NBA games were among the highest rated programs on ESPN of the year outside of NFL Football and the college football National Championship Game and Rose Bowl, so the lower wattage NBA games this year had a huge impact on the quarterly ratings (effectively having 10% of their evenings in the quarter switching from top tier ratings to filler compared to last year). Note that TNT, which got the benefit of a great 7-game Eastern Conference Finals featuring the Heat this year, received boffo ratings. NBC Sports Network effectively had the NHL equivalent this year of what ESPN had with the NBA last year, which was having large market teams in Chicago and Boston getting all the way to the Stanley Cup Finals, so that's the reason for their rise. The bottom line is that sexy matchups with marquee teams will draw viewers regardless of the quality of the announcers or pundits (whereas the best announcers in the world won't draw flies to a bad matchup).

Unfortunately, the ratings actually continue to show that we're a very vocal minority in terms of complaining about ESPN's pundit shows, as those have drawn much better audiences than the higher quality shows like Outside the Lines. To put the total day viewership numbers into perspective, ESPN still has more daily viewers than every other sports network combined.

I understand the facts Frank, but I've been waiting a long time to register one old man's dislike for the direction of sports broadcasting. I know I'm a statistical aberration but I am glad that I lived in the age of Curt Gowdy and Pee Wee Reese, Howard Cosell and Dandy Don Meredith, John Madden who was a breath of fresh air when he retired from coaching, and in the early days of ESPN Bob Ley.

I choose to believe that if I am in the minority on this with you then that is further proof that "Idiocracy" has come to fruition.

Plus 1 from me.
It seems like the new talent that ESPN is putting forth these days is VERY lacking.
I miss the old guys (and gals).

Good points above about talent lacking, types of shows have run a muck. In addition, I think Sportscenter has tanked majorly in its talent, highlights, structure of the show. I don't need to see NFL highlights related to a golf or college basketball highlight because they know NFL gets ratings year around. The "best of" or bringing in other coaches from other sports to talk a particular sport and relate it to theirs, yada yada yada. Sportscenter was great when they would take the highlights, do well with picking the right ones to show, knowing the highlight, having some interviews with them, and staying on topic/point rather than skipping on to a fabricated section they know draws ratings such as the NFL.

I hardly watch Sportscenter anymore, even if I know my team UL has a great chance of being a headline topic for the day.

(07-15-2013 10:49 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(07-15-2013 10:26 PM)JRsec Wrote:  ESPN really pushed a variety of unqualified personalities on us across the spectrum of their broadcasts and nothing is more off putting than to have many of these individuals trying to create news rather than reporting it, reporting it with obvious lack of understanding of the nuances of the games they are covering, and then politicizing the danged sports.

Nothing has offended me more than their push of who we are to reflect upon for the Heisman before the season is even a month away. I just wish they would show me the sports, give me the play by play, and then shut up and show me the scores on the ticker and the highlights on the tube. It really isn't that hard to do. And, I'm sick of talking heads over-talking one another on phony sports shows arguing points that nobody cares about.

I go to sports to get away from the View, Political Debate Shows, and Bloomberg's Self Promoting Discussions about Business. I watch sports because someone wins and someone loses and then it's over. I don't tune in to listen to two people I don't care about arguing about the game I just watched and telling me what to think about it. I can't think of anything more insulting for a broadcast team, or analysts to do. If ESPN is declining it is because of these things, not the games they put on, or even their competition, .....yet.

I agree with a lot of these viewpoints from a personal standpoint. However, the ESPN ratings decline has a pretty straightforward explanation: they only had 2 NBA playoff games involving either the Lakers or Heat this year and a 4-game sweep in the Western Conference Finals featuring small markets, whereas it had around 11 Heat or Lakers playoff games last year along with a 7-game Eastern Conference Finals between the Heat and Celtics that drove the network to record ratings. Those NBA games were among the highest rated programs on ESPN of the year outside of NFL Football and the college football National Championship Game and Rose Bowl, so the lower wattage NBA games this year had a huge impact on the quarterly ratings (effectively having 10% of their evenings in the quarter switching from top tier ratings to filler compared to last year). Note that TNT, which got the benefit of a great 7-game Eastern Conference Finals featuring the Heat this year, received boffo ratings. NBC Sports Network effectively had the NHL equivalent this year of what ESPN had with the NBA last year, which was having large market teams in Chicago and Boston getting all the way to the Stanley Cup Finals, so that's the reason for their rise. The bottom line is that sexy matchups with marquee teams will draw viewers regardless of the quality of the announcers or pundits (whereas the best announcers in the world won't draw flies to a bad matchup).

Unfortunately, the ratings actually continue to show that we're a very vocal minority in terms of complaining about ESPN's pundit shows, as those have drawn much better audiences than the higher quality shows like Outside the Lines. To put the total day viewership numbers into perspective, ESPN still has more daily viewers than every other sports network combined.

I wouldn't know, Frank. I haven't watched a single NBA game for one minute since 1985 and I rarely watch any ESPN content, except during/for an actual Notre Dame football or basketball game.

I just don't like the whole ESPN universe and the sports culture it creates/influences.

All of ESPN's "pundits", talk show hosts, Sportscenter, etc...could disappear overnight forever and I it would not bother me one bit.

If it collapsed into bankruptcy and no entity ever moved into the sports broadcast vacuum that created, I wouldn't mind.

In that universe, I would subscribe to und.com and/or whatever digital, pay network ND came up with for ND basketball games not shown on an OTA network.

Give me ABC and NBC OTA for ND football games, let me continue to subscribe and pay for MLB.com for Pirates games and Sunday Ticket for Steelers games and the rest of the sports broadcast industry could collapse and burn for all I care.

Even if my costs went way up, I would not mind if it meant the demise of ESPN.

(07-16-2013 07:06 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-15-2013 10:49 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(07-15-2013 10:26 PM)JRsec Wrote:  ESPN really pushed a variety of unqualified personalities on us across the spectrum of their broadcasts and nothing is more off putting than to have many of these individuals trying to create news rather than reporting it, reporting it with obvious lack of understanding of the nuances of the games they are covering, and then politicizing the danged sports.

Nothing has offended me more than their push of who we are to reflect upon for the Heisman before the season is even a month away. I just wish they would show me the sports, give me the play by play, and then shut up and show me the scores on the ticker and the highlights on the tube. It really isn't that hard to do. And, I'm sick of talking heads over-talking one another on phony sports shows arguing points that nobody cares about.

I go to sports to get away from the View, Political Debate Shows, and Bloomberg's Self Promoting Discussions about Business. I watch sports because someone wins and someone loses and then it's over. I don't tune in to listen to two people I don't care about arguing about the game I just watched and telling me what to think about it. I can't think of anything more insulting for a broadcast team, or analysts to do. If ESPN is declining it is because of these things, not the games they put on, or even their competition, .....yet.

I agree with a lot of these viewpoints from a personal standpoint. However, the ESPN ratings decline has a pretty straightforward explanation: they only had 2 NBA playoff games involving either the Lakers or Heat this year and a 4-game sweep in the Western Conference Finals featuring small markets, whereas it had around 11 Heat or Lakers playoff games last year along with a 7-game Eastern Conference Finals between the Heat and Celtics that drove the network to record ratings. Those NBA games were among the highest rated programs on ESPN of the year outside of NFL Football and the college football National Championship Game and Rose Bowl, so the lower wattage NBA games this year had a huge impact on the quarterly ratings (effectively having 10% of their evenings in the quarter switching from top tier ratings to filler compared to last year). Note that TNT, which got the benefit of a great 7-game Eastern Conference Finals featuring the Heat this year, received boffo ratings. NBC Sports Network effectively had the NHL equivalent this year of what ESPN had with the NBA last year, which was having large market teams in Chicago and Boston getting all the way to the Stanley Cup Finals, so that's the reason for their rise. The bottom line is that sexy matchups with marquee teams will draw viewers regardless of the quality of the announcers or pundits (whereas the best announcers in the world won't draw flies to a bad matchup).

Unfortunately, the ratings actually continue to show that we're a very vocal minority in terms of complaining about ESPN's pundit shows, as those have drawn much better audiences than the higher quality shows like Outside the Lines. To put the total day viewership numbers into perspective, ESPN still has more daily viewers than every other sports network combined.

I wouldn't know, Frank. I haven't watched a single NBA game for one minute since 1985 and I rarely watch any ESPN content, except during/for an actual Notre Dame football or basketball game.

I just don't like the whole ESPN universe and the sports culture it creates/influences.

All of ESPN's "pundits", talk show hosts, Sportscenter, etc...could disappear overnight forever and I it would not bother me one bit.

If it collapsed into bankruptcy and no entity ever moved into the sports broadcast vacuum that created, I wouldn't mind.

In that universe, I would subscribe to und.com and/or whatever digital, pay network ND came up with for ND basketball games not shown on an OTA network.

Give me ABC and NBC OTA for ND football games, let me continue to subscribe and pay for MLB.com for Pirates games and Sunday Ticket for Steelers games and the rest of the sports broadcast industry could collapse and burn for all I care.

Even if my costs went way up, I would not mind if it meant the demise of ESPN.

I understand the sentiment, although that's an inward-looking point of view ("I only like what I like and everything else can cease to exist"). However, your own alma mater is a direct beneficiary of the "ESPN culture" in the sense that Notre Dame is popular and people want to talk about them (good or bad), which in turn allows ND to have its own NBC contract that no one else has (and they are able to keep that contract, whether they're good or bad). ESPN and every other network simply wants to broadcast what draws ratings, and Notre Dame fits into that mold. That's the main reason why Notre Dame is still powerful today: it's not on-the-field results, but rather that they're on that short list of easy ESPN topics like whatever is happening with the Cowboys, Yankees, Lakers and LeBron. So, from your own personal point of view, I don't think it's necessarily a good thing at all for Notre Dame specifically if the ESPN culture goes away because that's actually what has kept the school relevant during the lean years. Without that ESPN culture, ND is just another "run of the mill" power team that people will only talk about when they're winning national championships (while their 6-6 seasons are ignored).

(07-16-2013 07:06 AM)TerryD Wrote:  I wouldn't know, Frank. I haven't watched a single NBA game for one minute since 1985 and I rarely watch any ESPN content, except during/for an actual Notre Dame football or basketball game.

I just don't like the whole ESPN universe and the sports culture it creates/influences.

All of ESPN's "pundits", talk show hosts, Sportscenter, etc...could disappear overnight forever and I it would not bother me one bit.

If it collapsed into bankruptcy and no entity ever moved into the sports broadcast vacuum that created, I wouldn't mind.

In that universe, I would subscribe to und.com and/or whatever digital, pay network ND came up with for ND basketball games not shown on an OTA network.

Give me ABC and NBC OTA for ND football games, let me continue to subscribe and pay for MLB.com for Pirates games and Sunday Ticket for Steelers games and the rest of the sports broadcast industry could collapse and burn for all I care.

Even if my costs went way up, I would not mind if it meant the demise of ESPN.

Of course you wouldn't as Pittsburgh hasn't had a professional basketball team since the 1970's and haven't had an NBA team since the league was called the BAA.

As for the rest of it, we get it you don't like ESPN. Unfortunately all sports networks copy the ESPN model even the RSNs since they want their journalists to do something other than read a copy about the day's games.

Question for those who don't like ESPN: What else would you have them put on the air at say 2 pm? Yes these "talking head shows" do suck, but they can't just go offline when sportscenter or live games aren't on. Something has to fill the gap.

ESPN is far from perfect but they cover sports, especially college sports, much more than anyone did before and for that I am grateful.

(07-16-2013 10:40 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  Question for those who don't like ESPN: What else would you have them put on the air at say 2 pm? Yes these "talking head shows" do suck, but they can't just go offline when sportscenter or live games aren't on. Something has to fill the gap.

ESPN is far from perfect but they cover sports, especially college sports, much more than anyone did before and for that I am grateful.

If I'm up at 2 in the morning I want what I once got from ESPN a loop of the days sports news and highlights. The problem is now they have multiple channels on which to fill space. If those talking head programs were relegated to those slots only then that's fine by me. I just don't want 2 hours solid of them between 4 PM and 6 PM every day on all of their channels.

(07-16-2013 10:47 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 10:40 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  Question for those who don't like ESPN: What else would you have them put on the air at say 2 pm? Yes these "talking head shows" do suck, but they can't just go offline when sportscenter or live games aren't on. Something has to fill the gap.

ESPN is far from perfect but they cover sports, especially college sports, much more than anyone did before and for that I am grateful.

If I'm up at 2 in the morning I want what I once got from ESPN a loop of the days sports news and highlights. The problem is now they have multiple channels on which to fill space. If those talking head programs were relegated to those slots only then that's fine by me. I just don't want 2 hours solid of them between 4 PM and 6 PM every day on all of their channels.

So basically just Sportscenter all day? Doesn't that get repetitive?

Talking head shows are hard to suffer, but I don't mind it in the afternoon when theres nothing else going on and you've probably already seen Sportscenter anyway.

I don't mind the talking head shows that are sports specific, like NFL, CFL Live, NBA, CBB, MLB, NHL...etc. What I don't like is that they aren't just discussing the sports but following the Fox News/TMZ style of sensationalism.

Also the worst show ever put on a sports network...Cold Pizza/First Take.

(07-16-2013 10:40 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  Question for those who don't like ESPN: What else would you have them put on the air at say 2 pm? Yes these "talking head shows" do suck, but they can't just go offline when sportscenter or live games aren't on. Something has to fill the gap.

ESPN is far from perfect but they cover sports, especially college sports, much more than anyone did before and for that I am grateful.

You stick in a tape-replay of a soccer game or a lacrosse game or something. You're telling me you can't find SOMETHING sports related to fill your TV airwaves?

I dont' mind SOME talking head shows.. but let's face it... That's ALL E*** does any more during the week other than their primetime lineup during the week.

Put ALL your sports talk shows on ESPN-News, with an occasional ESPN dual program... and put I don't know.. you know... actual SPORTS on the sports channels?


Heck, right now it's 12:12 pm... and fox sports midwest is basically running a Jackie Robinson documentary... Heck, it's not modern sports, but it's still sports related stuff. ESPN boasted about their huge library of films and such... how about use it?

(07-16-2013 10:02 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 07:06 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-15-2013 10:49 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(07-15-2013 10:26 PM)JRsec Wrote:  ESPN really pushed a variety of unqualified personalities on us across the spectrum of their broadcasts and nothing is more off putting than to have many of these individuals trying to create news rather than reporting it, reporting it with obvious lack of understanding of the nuances of the games they are covering, and then politicizing the danged sports.

Nothing has offended me more than their push of who we are to reflect upon for the Heisman before the season is even a month away. I just wish they would show me the sports, give me the play by play, and then shut up and show me the scores on the ticker and the highlights on the tube. It really isn't that hard to do. And, I'm sick of talking heads over-talking one another on phony sports shows arguing points that nobody cares about.

I go to sports to get away from the View, Political Debate Shows, and Bloomberg's Self Promoting Discussions about Business. I watch sports because someone wins and someone loses and then it's over. I don't tune in to listen to two people I don't care about arguing about the game I just watched and telling me what to think about it. I can't think of anything more insulting for a broadcast team, or analysts to do. If ESPN is declining it is because of these things, not the games they put on, or even their competition, .....yet.

I agree with a lot of these viewpoints from a personal standpoint. However, the ESPN ratings decline has a pretty straightforward explanation: they only had 2 NBA playoff games involving either the Lakers or Heat this year and a 4-game sweep in the Western Conference Finals featuring small markets, whereas it had around 11 Heat or Lakers playoff games last year along with a 7-game Eastern Conference Finals between the Heat and Celtics that drove the network to record ratings. Those NBA games were among the highest rated programs on ESPN of the year outside of NFL Football and the college football National Championship Game and Rose Bowl, so the lower wattage NBA games this year had a huge impact on the quarterly ratings (effectively having 10% of their evenings in the quarter switching from top tier ratings to filler compared to last year). Note that TNT, which got the benefit of a great 7-game Eastern Conference Finals featuring the Heat this year, received boffo ratings. NBC Sports Network effectively had the NHL equivalent this year of what ESPN had with the NBA last year, which was having large market teams in Chicago and Boston getting all the way to the Stanley Cup Finals, so that's the reason for their rise. The bottom line is that sexy matchups with marquee teams will draw viewers regardless of the quality of the announcers or pundits (whereas the best announcers in the world won't draw flies to a bad matchup).

Unfortunately, the ratings actually continue to show that we're a very vocal minority in terms of complaining about ESPN's pundit shows, as those have drawn much better audiences than the higher quality shows like Outside the Lines. To put the total day viewership numbers into perspective, ESPN still has more daily viewers than every other sports network combined.

I wouldn't know, Frank. I haven't watched a single NBA game for one minute since 1985 and I rarely watch any ESPN content, except during/for an actual Notre Dame football or basketball game.

I just don't like the whole ESPN universe and the sports culture it creates/influences.

All of ESPN's "pundits", talk show hosts, Sportscenter, etc...could disappear overnight forever and I it would not bother me one bit.

If it collapsed into bankruptcy and no entity ever moved into the sports broadcast vacuum that created, I wouldn't mind.

In that universe, I would subscribe to und.com and/or whatever digital, pay network ND came up with for ND basketball games not shown on an OTA network.

Give me ABC and NBC OTA for ND football games, let me continue to subscribe and pay for MLB.com for Pirates games and Sunday Ticket for Steelers games and the rest of the sports broadcast industry could collapse and burn for all I care.

Even if my costs went way up, I would not mind if it meant the demise of ESPN.

I understand the sentiment, although that's an inward-looking point of view ("I only like what I like and everything else can cease to exist"). However, your own alma mater is a direct beneficiary of the "ESPN culture" in the sense that Notre Dame is popular and people want to talk about them (good or bad), which in turn allows ND to have its own NBC contract that no one else has (and they are able to keep that contract, whether they're good or bad). ESPN and every other network simply wants to broadcast what draws ratings, and Notre Dame fits into that mold. That's the main reason why Notre Dame is still powerful today: it's not on-the-field results, but rather that they're on that short list of easy ESPN topics like whatever is happening with the Cowboys, Yankees, Lakers and LeBron. So, from your own personal point of view, I don't think it's necessarily a good thing at all for Notre Dame specifically if the ESPN culture goes away because that's actually what has kept the school relevant during the lean years. Without that ESPN culture, ND is just another "run of the mill" power team that people will only talk about when they're winning national championships (while their 6-6 seasons are ignored).

(07-16-2013 10:40 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  Question for those who don't like ESPN: [b]What else would you have them put on the air at say 2 pm? Yes these "talking head shows" do suck, but they can't just go offline when sportscenter or live games aren't on. Something has to fill the gap.[/b]

ESPN is far from perfect but they cover sports, especially college sports, much more than anyone did before and for that I am grateful.

Why not go offline?

How about dead air or a test pattern if they don't have a live game or Sportscenter to televise?

I grew up in an era before 24/7 sports coverage.

Networks used to sign off the air late at night because they had run out of stuff to televise.

Why does there have to be "filler" or "content" all day long?