The Fall of ESPN as an Information Source? (1 Viewer)

[GroveDiesel]

I know that it's been discussed somewhat in other threads but I was just curious to see just how many other people felt the same way that I do.

In the last 2-3 years it just seems like ESPN has really taken a nose dive in the quality of their NFL coverage. First of all, it feels like they just don't offer as much coverage in general. It seems like Len P, John Clayton and Mel Kiper are the only three guys that really provide much information anymore, at least through the website. And they RARELY break stories anymore. Even worse is Pasquarelli always claiming in his articles that ESPN.com is the one that broke the story when someone else like Jay Glazer at FOXSPORTS or Adam Schefter at NFLN actually broke the story.

They also seem to offer very few opinion pieces anymore. You can go to many other websites now and read up all about players, trades, etc. and get actual opinions on the moves. ESPN.com basically just glosses over that stuff with very generic commentary. Even when they actually do give their opinions, it seems heavily biased by their relationships with agents/players/GMs. I still can't get over Len P continually insisting that Todd Pinkston was a good receiver and that he'd end up making a significant contribution for somebody after getting cut by the Eagles.

And Mel Kiper was great at one time when nobody else out there was doing what he was doing and getting that much information out there. But now he just seems "Hollywood." He moves players all over his board seemingly at random sometimes. It also feels like his rankings of players recently have not only been wrong compared to how actual NFL teams viewed players, but wrong in how those players actually panned out.

All in all it just seems like other outlets have stepped up and been willing to provide the massive amounts of information that NFL fans crave. Jay Glazer at FOXSPORTS and Adam Schefter at NFLN are heads and shoulders above anyone else right now as far as providing information on players and teams. There are tons of websites out there now that give detailed information on players, moves and draft prospects.

Personally, I can't even remember the last time that I went to ESPN.com for information about the NFL.

 

[Zoomanji]

Len Pasqirelli is reporting that GroveDiesel is critizing ESPN.....

And I agree. And Kiper has become a complete joke.....

 

[The Shizzle]

Yeah I agree. I think with the success of Fantasy football, so many new websites are catering to it. So you have the opportunity to go to a specialized site where the writer strictly focuses on football. Also, local beat writers are getting to be a pretty important source of information.

I get most of my info from FBG too. If it's a story i will want to read deeper into, I will go the local paper's website.

 

[Bizkiteer]

You forgot their main man...MORT!

I think it has more to do with the fact that other people are being much aggressive in getting the info. Thus, ESPN is not the only one on the block anymore.

 

[prymetyme25]

I've been a espn insider for about 3 years and it's only good during draft time Football/Basketball. And to say that its supposed to be a premium service they dont update the info regularly. Thats my biggest peave with them.

On another note: has anyone ever looked into that Sports management thing that Kiper indorses?

 

[shamrock84]

Probably has something to do with the fact that ESPN reports actual stories that are confirmed by multiple sources using responsible journalism. All these other sites seem to throw out rumor as fact and so you think they're breaking the story first. IMHO ESPN is the source for official information bar none.

 

[shimtown]

If you would go onto there site ANYTHING that seems remotely interesting has the "IN" symbol besides it. NO THANKS!

 

[Jason Wood]

I think ESPN and all media companies for that matter are wrestling with the fact that information is becoming a commodity. How does one justify paying for ESPN Insider when 90% of the information is freely available on the web with little to no lag?

It's a quandary.

 

[BostonSportsGuy]

The fantasy "experts" on ESPN are jokes. Eric Karabell and that fat moron are terrible.

 

[perry147]

Probably has something to do with the fact that ESPN reports actual stories that are confirmed by multiple sources using responsible journalism. All these other sites seem to throw out rumor as fact and so you think they're breaking the story first. IMHO ESPN is the source for official information bar none.

This man knows things.Compare PFT and ESPN.PFT throws rumors out and they are often wrong meanwhile ESPN wants to at least have two different sources before a story goes onto the air.Another thing Scouts inc. makes ESPN insider worth it. Scouts Inc. is the best hand down IMHO (Well next to this crazy website named FBG :suckup

 

[GregR_2]

Probably has something to do with the fact that ESPN reports actual stories that are confirmed by multiple sources using responsible journalism. All these other sites seem to throw out rumor as fact and so you think they're breaking the story first. IMHO ESPN is the source for official information bar none.

This man knows things.

Compare PFT and ESPN.

PFT throws rumors out and they are often wrong meanwhile ESPN wants to at least have two different sources before a story goes onto the air.

Another thing Scouts inc. makes ESPN insider worth it. Scouts Inc. is the best hand down IMHO (Well next to this crazy website named FBG :suckup

The Scouts Inc info on the NFL draft is definitely why I subscribe, and what keeps me subscribed. Personally I feel they move a lot of stuff to Insider that should just be regular content, to try to justify the cost to people. Which doesn't impact me since I'm already paying for the Scouts Inc stuff, but if you haven't got the Insider subscription you do miss out on quite a few good articles.

 

[tppt]

you gotta buy thier insider content

hth

 

[phillyfan72]

I think it's ridiculous that they make you pay for information like the Insider service. You can get info from so many different sources now, there's no need to pay for it. I think they have some knowledgeable people (Mort, John Clayton), but if there's any significant news, those guys will be on SportsCenter talking about it.

I think that back in the day when they were the only main sports source, they were relevant. Now, they just have people that scream and shout and call it entertainment.

 

[prymetyme25]

Probably has something to do with the fact that ESPN reports actual stories that are confirmed by multiple sources using responsible journalism. All these other sites seem to throw out rumor as fact and so you think they're breaking the story first. IMHO ESPN is the source for official information bar none.

This man knows things.

Compare PFT and ESPN.

PFT throws rumors out and they are often wrong meanwhile ESPN wants to at least have two different sources before a story goes onto the air.

Another thing Scouts inc. makes ESPN insider worth it. Scouts Inc. is the best hand down IMHO (Well next to this crazy website named FBG :suckup

The Scouts Inc info on the NFL draft is definitely why I subscribe, and what keeps me subscribed. Personally I feel they move a lot of stuff to Insider that should just be regular content, to try to justify the cost to people. Which doesn't impact me since I'm already paying for the Scouts Inc stuff, but if you haven't got the Insider subscription you do miss out on quite a few good articles.

This is true but after the draft its like they stop reporting and grading these guys. everything seems to just stop. I'd like just alittle more info on rookies after the draft.

 

[perry147]

Probably has something to do with the fact that ESPN reports actual stories that are confirmed by multiple sources using responsible journalism. All these other sites seem to throw out rumor as fact and so you think they're breaking the story first. IMHO ESPN is the source for official information bar none.

:X This man knows things.

Compare PFT and ESPN.

PFT throws rumors out and they are often wrong meanwhile ESPN wants to at least have two different sources before a story goes onto the air.

Another thing Scouts inc. makes ESPN insider worth it. Scouts Inc. is the best hand down IMHO (Well next to this crazy website named FBG :suckup

The Scouts Inc info on the NFL draft is definitely why I subscribe, and what keeps me subscribed. Personally I feel they move a lot of stuff to Insider that should just be regular content, to try to justify the cost to people. Which doesn't impact me since I'm already paying for the Scouts Inc stuff, but if you haven't got the Insider subscription you do miss out on quite a few good articles.

This is true but after the draft its like they stop reporting and grading these guys. everything seems to just stop. I'd like just alittle more info on rookies after the draft.

But that is not what Scout Inc. does - They Scout players for NFL teams - once they have drafted they more or less move on to next years crop.

 

[dickey moe]

Mort and Jaworski are the only NFL guys worth listening to over there.

 

[Mungo Burrows]

Probably has something to do with the fact that ESPN reports actual stories that are confirmed by multiple sources using responsible journalism. All these other sites seem to throw out rumor as fact and so you think they're breaking the story first. IMHO ESPN is the source for official information bar none.

This man knows things.

Compare PFT and ESPN.

PFT throws rumors out and they are often wrong meanwhile ESPN wants to at least have two different sources before a story goes onto the air.

Another thing Scouts inc. makes ESPN insider worth it. Scouts Inc. is the best hand down IMHO (Well next to this crazy website named FBG :suckup

The original post wasn't talking about PFT, he was talking about guys like Schefter and Glazer. I'll throw in Cole and Robinson at Yahoo.com as well. These are equally "legitimate" journalists to anyone at ESPN and they have been scooping ESPN left and right. Edit to add: the only thing you might call into question is that Schefter technically works for an arm of the NFL, so you could potentially question his impartiality.If either of you guys claim that these guys are not fact checking or are simply rumormongering, you'd better come strong with some evidence to back that up.

 

[Dreamer]

If it's on ESPN or ESPN.com, I read it somewhere else yesterday.

 

[SteelerMurf]

What are you guys all talking about?

I thought ESPNs report of Steeler backup safety Tyrone Carter signing a 3 year deal with the Bears was great reporting.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Probably has something to do with the fact that ESPN reports actual stories that are confirmed by multiple sources using responsible journalism. All these other sites seem to throw out rumor as fact and so you think they're breaking the story first. IMHO ESPN is the source for official information bar none.

This man knows things.Compare PFT and ESPN.PFT throws rumors out and they are often wrong meanwhile ESPN wants to at least have two different sources before a story goes onto the air.Another thing Scouts inc. makes ESPN insider worth it. Scouts Inc. is the best hand down IMHO (Well next to this crazy website named FBG :suckup

I'll take your word for it on the Scouts, Inc. stuff. They seem like they do have pretty good stuff from what little I've read. I just don't care to fork over the money for Insider when I can get very similar info elsewhere for free.As to ESPN being credible journalists...uh, no. There have been quite a few instances over the past year or so where they've run incorrect information and then pulled it from their site later. Since you brought up PFT, I'll use them as my source on these recent ESPN gaffs:

Despite reports from ESPN, the Chicago Tribune, and WSCR to the contrary, a league source tells us that the Chicago Bears have not signed free-agent safety Tyrone Carter.Per the source, there are no plans to sign Carter, either.So what in the heck is going on here? The error seems to have originated with ESPN, which posted the information on Sunday night and then quietly pulled a Tribune-Review, wiping it off the electronic blackboard without comment. Apparently, the Chicago Tribune and/or WSCR haven't realized that ESPN has tried to put the toothpaste back in the tube.

Carter signed with the Steelers on Monday.And let's not act like ESPN has a slow trigger finger because of some sort of journalistic ethic. They have absolutely no problem stealing credit from other people and claiming that they broke the story. Several times just in the past week they've said that Len P first reported something when he did no such thing.ETA: And it seems to me that even the sites that run with rumors (like PFT) always say that they're rumors until they find out that they're confirmed fact.

 

[mggoilers]

If you would go onto there site ANYTHING that seems remotely interesting has the "IN" symbol besides it. NO THANKS!

Exactly, 95% of their content is considered INSIDER. The rest can be pulled off the wire. I rarely even watch Sportscenter these days. I don't mind the on-air talent, but they can only do so much with the time given. I think ESPN is just a product of the media environment. There are so many ways to get news, and they have alienated the core sports fan to appeal to the passing fan. The people on this board are surfing for NFL news in March, different breed.

 

[TheDirtyWord]

While I don't necessarily agree, what I would say is that NFL Network has become my primary sources for NFL information. Adam Schefter is the best inside NFL man now, but Glazer is within hailing distance.

I still like Mort & Clayton, but they seem to be counted on more for their opinion and 'feel' for how things are shaping up relating to certain topics rather than breaking new stories. However, I have noticed that these guys seem to be more plugged in come the season.

That said, ESPN relies on Pasquarelli to be their news story 'breaker' of sorts. This is where I think ESPn has fallen down. While I still read his Tip Sheet and Tip Sheet Notes, I've found in the last year that I've in some way shape or form know some of the information already. Not a majority of it, but a decent amount.

I'm such a NFL information consumer though that I'm always checking the outlets so I'm finding it rarer and rarer that anything surprises me. For instance, I circled around with a work buddy who I talk football with from time to time (although he's more of a college guy). I asked him what he thought of the Schaub trade and he didn't even know he'd been traded. Sometimes I wonder how 'in the minority' I am in with respect to the general population...

Even with PFT, they get some of their rumors right, so even when the story breaks - PFT has most likely tipped me off. They geta lot of stuff wrong still, but not as much as they used to.

Anyway, ESPN still is the granddaddy and deserves respect for the fact that it spawned the sports information industry.

 

[messinwithu]

I no longer go to ESPN.com to check on news and player movement. I will not pay for the insider information because most times you are paying for someone's opinion and really they might not have a better idea of what they are writing then the guys here. I will pay for FBG because there is much more than just opinions offered here. If there is news then many sources will have the same info. I know that people pay for being an insider but I think that ESPN.com has lost a lot of people visiting their site since they are not part of the IN group.

 

[Rozelle]

I have no problem with media outlets reporting rumors, as long as they report it as a rumor.

ESPN cannot compete, as far as NFL info and ex-players turned anaylist is concerned, with NFLN.

 

[KING]

ESPN is not concerned or about information. they never have been. information is a by product. they are about entertainment. what do you think the E is for?

 

[nygiants56]

that espn pay service is a joke as , I agree 100%

their information has gone downhill , fast.

nfl.com is a decent source, Shefter is almost always on the money.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Clayton's info this year was particularly bad and often wrong.

 

[Foosball God]

I don't even go to ESPN.com anymore. I can get all the same information for free on SI.com.

 

[EBF]

I stopped going to ESPN.com once they made all the good articles Insider only. It doesn't help that their website is loaded with annoying videos and ads.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I stopped going to ESPN.com once they made all the good articles Insider only. It doesn't help that their website is loaded with annoying videos and ads.

Their website is terrible. Pop-ups non-stop (that even get past Firefox...theirs is the only site where the popups do not get blocked), annoying vidoes that turn on automatically (which interrupts my music listening), and, like you said, any article worth a darn is an Insider one. Lame.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Len Pasqirelli is reporting that GroveDiesel is critizing ESPN.....

 

[GregR_2]

Do people here really care all that much who breaks a story? I don't really care who broke it as long as whatever sites I use are quick to pick up any story so they have complete info. Some of the best info I get during the season is from the FBG emails and they don't break anything.

 

[bcr8f]

Probably has something to do with the fact that ESPN reports actual stories that are confirmed by multiple sources using responsible journalism. All these other sites seem to throw out rumor as fact and so you think they're breaking the story first. IMHO ESPN is the source for official information bar none.

This man knows things.Compare PFT and ESPN.PFT throws rumors out and they are often wrong meanwhile ESPN wants to at least have two different sources before a story goes onto the air.Another thing Scouts inc. makes ESPN insider worth it. Scouts Inc. is the best hand down IMHO (Well next to this crazy website named FBG :suckup

It's called journalism.

 

[BGP]

I used to use ESPN's website a lot around 1995-1997 when it looked like this:

http://web.archive.org/web/19971210130400/...sportszone.com/

But they kept adding the latest flash ads and increasing numbers of popups that I stopped going there somewhere around 1999. I've used Yahoo! sports as my basic outlet ever since because they were basically text like ESPN used to be. In the past year Yahoo has undergone a revision and its starting to get cluttered. I expect in another 2-4 years I'll stop going to Yahoo! sports as well as they move away from text.

 

[BGP]

What is interesting is I have been seeing "filter services" pop up on the web. Basically, they have a web crawler that grabs all the news articles and filters out every image and every ad. Then they just repost it on their site with JUST the story. Just text. Then they offer a link to the actual site they got it from.

 

[greyone]

The rise of the NFL Network has surely cut into ESPN's domination.

More sources willing to use Schefter or anyone associated with The Network.

But i think ESPN does a fine job. with the Huddle, NFL Live, Sportcenter, Countdown to the draft.

 

[Spiderman]

Love Clayton and Mortenson for their NFL coverage, but Clayton's had a rough off-season, and I'm only talking about the Bears.

1) Is a weekly guest on ESPN AM 1000 in Chicago, and 2 days before the Thomas Jones trade, flat out said, that Jones would not be traded, and he'd be a Bear in 2007.

2) This past Sunday, he had the Bears signing Carter.

Yes, even John Clayton does get things wrong, and I still like him, but I have to realize that a lot of the information he gets comes from talking with local reporters.

I think Pastabelly writes a very good Friday column - the Inside Tip Sheet. Great 'Around the NFL' report.

The one thing I hate about ESPN, and I think it stands out in MLB, is the pandering towards certain players - acting like Barry Bonds is accomplishing something that is genuine, their experts talking about Barry the player without mentioning whatever he's injecting into his body. At times, you can see that conflict of interest in their analysts.....

 

[Native]

Theres two answers to this question imo:

1) ESPN is certainly to blame for their uber-commercializtion of their network, and sports in general. The product they put out is so grandiose and contrived that its difficult to take their programming seriously anymore. Theres too much innane commentary, too much hype of star players, too much emphasis on "storylines", too many annoying jokes/slang from the Sportcenter crew. In general, theres just too much clutter and noise. So yeah, they are to blame. At its absolute best, sports should be something that evokes passion and emotion. Unfortunately, ESPN has quit trying to motivate and inspire their viewers a long time ago. Now they go for the cheap laugh and the storyline that generates the highest advertising revenues. A monumental pity.

2) Having said that, a lot of traditional media outlets are struggling to catch up to the Internet in terms of the quantity, quality and delivery of information that is available to the typical web surfer. The up-to-the-minute information we receive from insiders posting on messaging boards, web blogs and content websites has made it difficult for all traditional media outlets to compete in a web-based world - not just ESPN, but newspapers, magazines, etc. By the time these outlets produce information thats ready to air/print, the story has circulated across the internet and back. So theyre in a tough predicament.

Anyway, Im not exonerating ESPN from their shameless butchering of sports reporting and entertainment. Its still awful. But theres a lot going on here.

 

[massraider]

2) Having said that, a lot of traditional media outlets are struggling to catch up to the Internet in terms of the quantity, quality and delivery of information that is available to the typical web surfer. The up-to-the-minute information we receive from insiders posting on messaging boards, web blogs and content websites has made it difficult for all traditional media outlets to compete in a web-based world - not just ESPN, but newspapers, magazines, etc. By the time these outlets produce information thats ready to air/print, the story has circulated across the internet and back. So theyre in a tough predicament.

Anyway, Im not exonerating ESPN from their shameless butchering of sports reporting and entertainment. Its still awful. But theres a lot going on here.

This is a good point. I never visit ESPN.com, and rarely seem to be missing out on any hot scoops. I just can't stand the site, with the constant ads, video crap, and flashy crap I am not looking for. It's like driving through Times Square.

For true info junkies, you can cruise the wire at KFFL and rotoworld, and active message boards like this one, and you'll get the info faster than any website. It isn't like ESPN.com is lagging behind sportsline or FOXsports.com or anything.

 

[Native]

2) Having said that, a lot of traditional media outlets are struggling to catch up to the Internet in terms of the quantity, quality and delivery of information that is available to the typical web surfer. The up-to-the-minute information we receive from insiders posting on messaging boards, web blogs and content websites has made it difficult for all traditional media outlets to compete in a web-based world - not just ESPN, but newspapers, magazines, etc. By the time these outlets produce information thats ready to air/print, the story has circulated across the internet and back. So theyre in a tough predicament.

Anyway, Im not exonerating ESPN from their shameless butchering of sports reporting and entertainment. Its still awful. But theres a lot going on here.

This is a good point. I never visit ESPN.com, and rarely seem to be missing out on any hot scoops. I just can't stand the site, with the constant ads, video crap, and flashy crap I am not looking for. It's like driving through Times Square.

For true info junkies, you can cruise the wire at KFFL and rotoworld, and active message boards like this one, and you'll get the info faster than any website. It isn't like ESPN.com is lagging behind sportsline or FOXsports.com or anything.

Thats what makes Google all the more interesting. The paid "Advertisement Campaigns" they offer - which generate billions annually - are all text based. Theres no extraneous pop up banners, images, flashing signs, etc. And thats one of the big hidden drivers behind their success. And its not done by accident either. Trust me, those guys know EXACTLY what theyre doing. I hope that companies like ESPN will eventually start to understand that people really dont like all the bells and whistles on their website and channel. Its a shame really, because theyre in such a massive position of power and they influence the sports market so drastically. Wishful thinking I guess.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Do people here really care all that much who breaks a story? I don't really care who broke it as long as whatever sites I use are quick to pick up any story so they have complete info. Some of the best info I get during the season is from the FBG emails and they don't break anything.

I don't really care who breaks a story. What I do care about is when somebody is just repeating information that somebody else managed to break but claiming that they are the original source for the story. If this were some rinky dink site or a message board doing it, it would be one thing. But for the largest sports website/news source in the world to continually pull that move is pathetic. If someone at the NYT, Washington Post or LA Times was doing the same thing in the paper week after week, not only would it get noticed, but it would be a huge deal and the person would be fired. Just look at that sports reporter in Boston that got suspended after plagiarizing someone else's work. What Len Pasquarelli is doing is just as bad IMO. Someone else out there busted their butt to get a story and Len P and ESPN simply take it and run it as if they're the first ones to accounce it.

 

[fatness]

I don't really care who breaks a story. What I do care about is when somebody is just repeating information that somebody else managed to break but claiming that they are the original source for the story. If this were some rinky dink site or a message board doing it, it would be one thing. But for the largest sports website/news source in the world to continually pull that move is pathetic.

It's just a big fat sense of entitlement and self-importance on ESPN's part. "We're the ones who decide if a story is legit, and once we decide it's legit we get credit for it" seems to be the rule. ESPN is neither as informative nor as entertaining as it used to be.

 

[Gottabesweet]

I dont even use espn. You need to be an insider for everything.

I prefer footballguys for my sports, fflivewire and cbs sportsline.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Probably has something to do with the fact that ESPN reports actual stories that are confirmed by multiple sources using responsible journalism. All these other sites seem to throw out rumor as fact and so you think they're breaking the story first. IMHO ESPN is the source for official information bar none.

Although . . . I remember a thread with a title similar to this one's after ESPN reported that TO had attempted suicide.They had a few inaccurate "scoops" within a relatively short period of time and seemed to be becoming more like PFT in that regard.

 

[Hairy Snowman]

Probably has something to do with the fact that ESPN reports actual stories that are confirmed by multiple sources using responsible journalism. All these other sites seem to throw out rumor as fact and so you think they're breaking the story first. IMHO ESPN is the source for official information bar none.

Although . . . I remember a thread with a title similar to this one's after ESPN reported that TO had attempted suicide.They had a few inaccurate "scoops" within a relatively short period of time and seemed to be becoming more like PFT in that regard.

I remember -

 

[phillyfan72]

Do people here really care all that much who breaks a story? I don't really care who broke it as long as whatever sites I use are quick to pick up any story so they have complete info. Some of the best info I get during the season is from the FBG emails and they don't break anything.

I don't really care who breaks a story. What I do care about is when somebody is just repeating information that somebody else managed to break but claiming that they are the original source for the story. If this were some rinky dink site or a message board doing it, it would be one thing. But for the largest sports website/news source in the world to continually pull that move is pathetic. If someone at the NYT, Washington Post or LA Times was doing the same thing in the paper week after week, not only would it get noticed, but it would be a huge deal and the person would be fired. Just look at that sports reporter in Boston that got suspended after plagiarizing someone else's work. What Len Pasquarelli is doing is just as bad IMO. Someone else out there busted their butt to get a story and Len P and ESPN simply take it and run it as if they're the first ones to accounce it.

Pasquarrelli is a rip-off and just yesterday ESPN reported Michael Smith broke the Dre Bly extension with the Broncos, when NFL Network had already reported it. That's just irresponsible and as pointed out above, it's plagiarizing.

 

[Da Guru]

ESPN ans sports is going the way of MTV and music.

Now MTV does not even play music.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Love Clayton and Mortenson for their NFL coverage, but Clayton's had a rough off-season, and I'm only talking about the Bears. 1) Is a weekly guest on ESPN AM 1000 in Chicago, and 2 days before the Thomas Jones trade, flat out said, that Jones would not be traded, and he'd be a Bear in 2007.2) This past Sunday, he had the Bears signing Carter. Yes, even John Clayton does get things wrong, and I still like him, but I have to realize that a lot of the information he gets comes from talking with local reporters.I think Pastabelly writes a very good Friday column - the Inside Tip Sheet. Great 'Around the NFL' report.The one thing I hate about ESPN, and I think it stands out in MLB, is the pandering towards certain players - acting like Barry Bonds is accomplishing something that is genuine, their experts talking about Barry the player without mentioning whatever he's injecting into his body. At times, you can see that conflict of interest in their analysts.....

Picking up where he left off last season. I really dont recall any of his predictions regarding whether players would dress or not being correct last season. He had been the most reliable in the past, but he really was bad last season and is off to a similar start now. It's a shame.

 

[BigJim®]

I know that it's been discussed somewhat in other threads but I was just curious to see just how many other people felt the same way that I do. In the last 2-3 years it just seems like ESPN has really taken a nose dive in the quality of their NFL coverage. First of all, it feels like they just don't offer as much coverage in general. It seems like Len P, John Clayton and Mel Kiper are the only three guys that really provide much information anymore, at least through the website. And they RARELY break stories anymore. Even worse is Pasquarelli always claiming in his articles that ESPN.com is the one that broke the story when someone else like Jay Glazer at FOXSPORTS or Adam Schefter at NFLN actually broke the story.They also seem to offer very few opinion pieces anymore. You can go to many other websites now and read up all about players, trades, etc. and get actual opinions on the moves. ESPN.com basically just glosses over that stuff with very generic commentary. Even when they actually do give their opinions, it seems heavily biased by their relationships with agents/players/GMs. I still can't get over Len P continually insisting that Todd Pinkston was a good receiver and that he'd end up making a significant contribution for somebody after getting cut by the Eagles.And Mel Kiper was great at one time when nobody else out there was doing what he was doing and getting that much information out there. But now he just seems "Hollywood." He moves players all over his board seemingly at random sometimes. It also feels like his rankings of players recently have not only been wrong compared to how actual NFL teams viewed players, but wrong in how those players actually panned out.All in all it just seems like other outlets have stepped up and been willing to provide the massive amounts of information that NFL fans crave. Jay Glazer at FOXSPORTS and Adam Schefter at NFLN are heads and shoulders above anyone else right now as far as providing information on players and teams. There are tons of websites out there now that give detailed information on players, moves and draft prospects. Personally, I can't even remember the last time that I went to ESPN.com for information about the NFL.

Very ESPN's credibility in in question on so many grounds. They do claim stories they haven't broken themselves, their staff (particularly Len P) does have relationships which compromise his opinions, they often seem to spend more energy creating news than reporting news, and they hold orchestrated/contrived interviews with certain players, tossing softballs just to keep the lines of communication open. They really are not very credible IMHO, and its the last place I'd look for an honest take on any particular story.

 

[BigRed]

ESPN is not concerned or about information. they never have been. information is a by product. they are about entertainment. what do you think the E is for?

Somebody gets it. Saying they've been a joke of a circus full of clowns for many many years ranks up there with the water-is-wet statements. I'm amazed this would be news to anyone paying attention. That's why guys like Irvin, Sharpe, etc are pefect fits.PS their PAY FFLs suck too. Surprise.