What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Rise and Fall of ESPN (1 Viewer)

fantasycurse42 said:
I want my sports to be my sports, I don't need to hear a bunch of talking heads discussing political, racial, and whatever else comes into their minds - basically everything except what I'm tuning in for. 

I get those opinions from longtime / well-respected journalists in PTI, 30 minutes of that is more than I need. These two have never done anything to earn respect IMO (certainly not Hill), so their opinions are worthless and without the simple highlights and news I want, SC6 is unwatchable IMO. 
Click to expand...
Dead on...ESPN is chasing demographics that will not be loyal to them at the expense of those that have been...

 
The day they stopped putting their loyal customers first is the day they began their decline.

In the old days ESPN would show all the NFL highlights first, then show all the NBA highlights, etc. If you were a fan of a particular sport it was easy to tune in for the 6-7 minutes that interested you, and then youd move on. Seems simple enough.

But then some smart guy at the network figured they can make people tune in for longer by mixing the sports highlights so you never knew when your content would air. Just an awful strategy. It was the equivalent of creating the qwerty keyboard to stop people from being efficient when they type.

Wonder what happened to the exec who made that decision.

 
Native said:
The day they stopped putting their loyal customers first is the day they began their decline.

In the old days ESPN would show all the NFL highlights first, then show all the NBA highlights, etc. If you were a fan of a particular sport it was easy to tune in for the 6-7 minutes that interested you, and then youd move on. Seems simple enough.

But then some smart guy at the network figured they can make people tune in for longer by mixing the sports highlights so you never knew when your content would air. Just an awful strategy. It was the equivalent of creating the qwerty keyboard to stop people from being efficient when they type.

Wonder what happened to the exec who made that decision.
Click to expand...
Even if they didn't start mixing it up, that strategy was doomed eventually. People in general aren't fans of leagues. They aren't MLB fans. They're Yankee fans, or Dodgers fans, or Cardinals fans, etc, etc.. They aren't NFL fans. They're Packers fans, or Cowboys fans, or 49ers fans, etc, etc....

People when they're young may think they are fans of the entire sport, but eventually they find being such too daunting and time consuming. Eventually they just want to follow their favorite team instead of the entire sport.

As soon as a competitor, in this case Fox, started giving people channels that focused on their teams in general, such as 30 minute shows focusing on their favorite team on regional channels, ESPN was going to lose viewers to them. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Walking Boot said:
ESPN hasn't honestly broken a story in a decade, if not more. Sure, they claim to have broken news, but, they really just steal it from someone else and then preface the report with "ESPN is learning..." or "ESPN is reporting..." with zero credit to the original source.

So, they don't need to pay for insiders. They just need to have college interns constantly refreshing twitter.
Click to expand...
Kaylee Hartung breaks news in my pants. 

 
fantasycurse42 said:
http://thebiglead.com/2017/05/09/sc6-michael-smith-jemele-hill-ratings-espn-sportscenter/

I was curious how SC6 was doing, article is a few weeks old, but considering the investment they've put into it, they can't be happy with the return as of yet. 

When we look back at ESPN really declining in 10 years from now, I think SC6 will be the moment we can point to and say "they knew they were dead in the water here and were trying anything."
Click to expand...
Everything has to be about race or politics now. Never any other reasons. Always blame one of those and you're good. 

 
Native said:
The day they stopped putting their loyal customers first is the day they began their decline.

In the old days ESPN would show all the NFL highlights first, then show all the NBA highlights, etc. If you were a fan of a particular sport it was easy to tune in for the 6-7 minutes that interested you, and then youd move on. Seems simple enough.

But then some smart guy at the network figured they can make people tune in for longer by mixing the sports highlights so you never knew when your content would air. Just an awful strategy. It was the equivalent of creating the qwerty keyboard to stop people from being efficient when they type.

Wonder what happened to the exec who made that decision.
Click to expand...
This is a good post, but they don't even show ####### highlights anymore so it is really tilting at windmills.  We're so far beyond this being ESPN's problem it is ridiculous.

One thing is for certain:  It is pretty stupid to outbid other networks for things and only have them available for streaming.

 
NewlyRetired said:
They have shown every one of those over the years going all the way back to the 1994 World Cup, with the exception of the Bundesliga.

They were the first to have the EPL, the first to have the Champions League, the first to have MLS, the first to have Euro Cup, first to have Gold Cup, first to have Copa America etc etc.

Basically NBC and Fox only jumped in to the pool after ESPN made the sport viable in the US (for English language stations specifically).

As with all sports rights they move from station to station over time.  Turner is the latest to jump into the soccer pool, spending a ton to get the rights for the Champions League.
Click to expand...
Sure, they HAD it.  But, they don't have it now.  So while you're watching mid-week soccer on the other networks, ESPN is throwing out league specific talk shows even during the offseason.  Even worse, when they do have soccer rights they pre-empt them for college softball/lacrosse.  Terrible.

 
The downfall started with cancelling Playmakers back in 2003 after pressure from the NFL. Instead, ESPN should have started making more original content way back then. Fast forward to today and the game is all about original content. I give ESPN Films credit for some great 30 for 30 content, but they need a lot more.

 
TwinTurbo said:
The downfall started with cancelling Playmakers back in 2003 after pressure from the NFL. Instead, ESPN should have started making more original content way back then. Fast forward to today and the game is all about original content. I give ESPN Films credit for some great 30 for 30 content, but they need a lot more.
Click to expand...


So mtvpn?

 
Slapdash said:
Sure, they HAD it.  But, they don't have it now.  
Click to expand...
That is not what we were discussing.  The poster was unaware ESPN ever had soccer properties.  They have had almost every soccer property at one time or another.  Now the properties are spread amongst many different carries (Turner, NBC, Fox, Univision, beIN and ESPN).

ESPN still has the Euro Cup, MLS, US National Team and other soccer properties but no where near as many properties as in years past.  The sport simply became way too big for just one carrier to cover in the US.

 
The internet and YT have made catching highlights really easy to find everywhere now, but the lack of actual game highlights on Sportscaster got really bad years ago.  Even Prime Time's highlights got bad.  Back in the day, the highlights of every game was like a short story, with Berman and Jackson narrating it wonderfully, but then every game except maybe a couple got condensed down into 30 seconds or less.  

 
culdeus said:
So mtvpn?
Click to expand...
No HBOPN. Why is a series like Ballers on HBO and not ESPN? ESPN2 or some other ESPN variant should have just been original content and nothing else. There are like 7 different ESPN channels but very little original content outside of live sporting events. So at the end of the day, ESPN has massive, fixed costs that aren't adjustable no matter how many employees it cuts.

And that's the underlying problem with a backwards business model based on paying billions of dollars to leagues for broadcast rights before they can make single dollar of profit. Add in that fact that the value of sports broadcast rights was already artificially inflated since many cable subscribers don't actually watch ESPN. For years ESPN has been making lots of money off people that didn't watch them. Now with cord-cutting, that weakness is being exposed and they can't really go direct to consumer in the same way as HBO because they don't have much original content.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
As if we need any more proof that ESPN loves interjecting politics into everything now, Peyton Manning playing golf with Trump is one of their current top headlines on espn.com. :lol:  

 
Native said:
The day they stopped putting their loyal customers first is the day they began their decline.

In the old days ESPN would show all the NFL highlights first, then show all the NBA highlights, etc. If you were a fan of a particular sport it was easy to tune in for the 6-7 minutes that interested you, and then youd move on. Seems simple enough.

But then some smart guy at the network figured they can make people tune in for longer by mixing the sports highlights so you never knew when your content would air. Just an awful strategy. It was the equivalent of creating the qwerty keyboard to stop people from being efficient when they type.

Wonder what happened to the exec who made that decision.
Click to expand...
Was likely promoted. 

 
I have been watching ESPN since Chris Bergman was thin and had hair. The reason it did so well was that it was the only place to get your sports fix.you had your Sportscentee and your news shoes, but you could also watch off-beat stuff like lumberjack competitions or strongman competitions. It felt like you were part of an club. You couldn't get that anywhere else.

When you watched Berman and Vitale and all the other original guys it felt like you were hanging out with your buddies taking sports. The nicknames and catchphrases weren't fake, that was just their personality. 

Now, it's become corporate and slick and it's about ratings and money. On-air talent tries to come up with silly personalities or catchphrases or they try to appeal to a crowd they aren't part of. It all comes off as fake. 

ESPN was destined to fall. It's model of sports highlights and commentary became obsolete as the internet grew and things like Twitter and streaming allowed us to consume our sports content immediately wherever and whenever we wanted to. By the time Sportscenter broadcasts something it's already been processed and forgotten by most of us. ESPN is on the same boat newspapers were at the turn of the century. 

The only sports-related content that people will flock to the television for are the actual live games. Everything else is just a waste of time,

 
Eephus said:
Interesting article from John Ourand of Sports Business Daily posted today.  You'll have to read around a subscription nag but it's possible to read the entire article.

The writer primarily puts the blame on overbidding on broadcast rights but also mentions Disney's decision to license their content to other streaming services as a driver for cord cutting.
Click to expand...
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/08/disney-will-pull-its-movies-from-netflix-and-start-its-own-streaming-services.html

referenced in netflix thread:

The new platform will be the home for all Disney movies going forward, starting with the 2019 theatrical slate which includes "Toy Story 4," "Frozen 2," and the upcoming live-action "The Lion King." It will also be making a "significant investment" in exclusive movies and television series for the new platform.

The company will also launch its own ESPN video streaming service in early 2018. The platform, which will feature about 10,000 sporting events each year, will have content from the MLB, NHL, MLS, collegiate sports and tennis' Grand Slam events.

 
I'm surprised it took Disney this long to go it alone on streaming.  They have an established brand and a deep library of content that will have tremendous appeal to their audience niche.

As for ESPN, they're just chasing the cord cutters.  They're basically cannibalizing themselves and in some cases, will have to pay more for streaming rights.  If they're selling monthly subscriptions, they also run the risk of attracting seasonal fans who will join for events.

 
Eephus said:
I'm surprised it took Disney this long to go it alone on streaming.  They have an established brand and a deep library of content that will have tremendous appeal to their audience niche.

As for ESPN, they're just chasing the cord cutters.  They're basically cannibalizing themselves and in some cases, will have to pay more for streaming rights.  If they're selling monthly subscriptions, they also run the risk of attracting seasonal fans who will join for events.
Click to expand...
I have no idea what they are even thinking with this ESPN app and frankly I don't think they do either.  This is basically rolling the BamTech properties (out-of-market MLB and NHL) into their Tier 3 and 4 college properties while maintaining their current ESPN3 streaming service.   I don't think that solves any of their cord-cutting problems, but what do I know.  I can't imagine paying $9.99 a month for those properties, but maybe I'm in the minority.  

It just seems like this concept is a Frozen band-aid on the problem, a band-aid that quickly is discarded.  

 
culdeus said:
Lol at 9.99 a month for tier 3 garbage. 

They get 8 to 10 from cable subs for full rights. 
Click to expand...
"Garbage" is relative though.  For some perspective Bam Tech had 7.5 million paid subscribers.  Now this includes MLB.tv, the NHL, the PGA Tour, the WWE and the HBOGo app (WWE had 1.5 million and MLB.tv had 3.5m in its various forms), so there will be a built in subscriber base.  However that MLB base is used to paying $115-29 a year for all out of market games.  So they are already at that $9.99 a month price point for one league, never mind the NHL or any college sports. Like you I can't see many "new" subs for these properties unless these digital packages become more robust and that isn't happening anytime soon.

 
Sammy3469 said:
"Garbage" is relative though.  For some perspective Bam Tech had 7.5 million paid subscribers.  Now this includes MLB.tv, the NHL, the PGA Tour, the WWE and the HBOGo app (WWE had 1.5 million and MLB.tv had 3.5m in its various forms), so there will be a built in subscriber base.  However that MLB base is used to paying $115-29 a year for all out of market games.  So they are already at that $9.99 a month price point for one league, never mind the NHL or any college sports. Like you I can't see many "new" subs for these properties unless these digital packages become more robust and that isn't happening anytime soon.
Click to expand...
It will work if this doesnt region restrict like MLB.tv. maybe. 

 
culdeus said:
It will work if this doesnt region restrict like MLB.tv. maybe. 
Click to expand...
Except MLB/ESPN don't have those rights and probably never will, the individual teams have their own in-market streaming rights (i.e. the Dodgers own their LA rights).  This is one of the reasons the MLB package sucks (relatively) unless your favorite team is out of market.  

My ultimate guess is this is really a cost defraying play to defray the costs of stuff like the ACCNetwork.  To make even a dent on the top-line the number of subs they need for the "crap" product just doesn't compute.  Until they get in-market streaming rights this entire exercise just seems like a time waster.  

 
Sammy3469 said:
Except MLB/ESPN don't have those rights and probably never will, the individual teams have their own in-market streaming rights (i.e. the Dodgers own their LA rights).  This is one of the reasons the MLB package sucks (relatively) unless your favorite team is out of market.  

My ultimate guess is this is really a cost defraying play to defray the costs of stuff like the ACCNetwork.  To make even a dent on the top-line the number of subs they need for the "crap" product just doesn't compute.  Until they get in-market streaming rights this entire exercise just seems like a time waster.  
Click to expand...
Ok, then I don't really understand at all what this is.  If it's not in-market then there is no real appeal.  I would guess many of the subs of MLB.TV are using an DNS unblocker to avoid region restriction, and other products are similarly unblocked.  

I've always thought the first product to break region restriction will have appeal in the broad market for streaming.  I quit messing with the hassle of dns unblocking MLB.TV and just quit watching altogether.  

If this is region unrestricted content and tier 3/4 then it is hot garbage.  

 
Sammy3469 said:
"Garbage" is relative though.  For some perspective Bam Tech had 7.5 million paid subscribers.  Now this includes MLB.tv, the NHL, the PGA Tour, the WWE and the HBOGo app (WWE had 1.5 million and MLB.tv had 3.5m in its various forms), so there will be a built in subscriber base.  However that MLB base is used to paying $115-29 a year for all out of market games.  So they are already at that $9.99 a month price point for one league, never mind the NHL or any college sports. Like you I can't see many "new" subs for these properties unless these digital packages become more robust and that isn't happening anytime soon.
Click to expand...
I think this is just Step 1 though. I figure it's just a matter of time before ESPN outbids NBC for NHL and gets exclusive control of broadcast/streaming and then tries to do the same with MLB. Even if region restrictions apply, there are large portions of this country with transplants who would buy this.

As somebody who uses both Directv Center Ice and mlb.tv, I figure it's just a matter of time before they screw up both of those products.

 
ESPN is garbage & will only get worse. They cover the worst sport & league on the planet the NBA 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Football getting ready to start & what do you hear all day every day. Are the caves going to trade kyrie someone or something. None of their personnel know anything other than the NBA, its pathetic.

 
SoCalBroncoFan said:
I have been watching ESPN since Chris Bergman was thin and had hair. The reason it did so well was that it was the only place to get your sports fix.you had your Sportscentee and your news shoes, but you could also watch off-beat stuff like lumberjack competitions or strongman competitions. It felt like you were part of an club. You couldn't get that anywhere else.

When you watched Berman and Vitale and all the other original guys it felt like you were hanging out with your buddies taking sports. The nicknames and catchphrases weren't fake, that was just their personality. 

Now, it's become corporate and slick and it's about ratings and money. On-air talent tries to come up with silly personalities or catchphrases or they try to appeal to a crowd they aren't part of. It all comes off as fake. 

ESPN was destined to fall. It's model of sports highlights and commentary became obsolete as the internet grew and things like Twitter and streaming allowed us to consume our sports content immediately wherever and whenever we wanted to. By the time Sportscenter broadcasts something it's already been processed and forgotten by most of us. ESPN is on the same boat newspapers were at the turn of the century. 

The only sports-related content that people will flock to the television for are the actual live games. Everything else is just a waste of time,
Click to expand...
With ESPN I think they figured they were "too big to fail."  Big part of the reason I quit watching sports is how unbearable it had become to actually watch ESPN.  So sick of the talking head culture.  Ever since ABC/Disney took over they abandoned the casual coverage of actual sports that made them famous to sensationalist 24/7 cutting edge news cycle trash.  If you look at barstoolsports, deadspin, sports twitter it's all lightyears more enjoyable and they're doing it with way less resources.  You can tell ESPN's dependency on access sometimes forces them to avoid being critical of the leagues in an honest way.  

It's obsolete anymore just like you said.  I'll be glad to see it go. 

 
culdeus said:
Ok, then I don't really understand at all what this is.  If it's not in-market then there is no real appeal.  I would guess many of the subs of MLB.TV are using an DNS unblocker to avoid region restriction, and other products are similarly unblocked.  

I've always thought the first product to break region restriction will have appeal in the broad market for streaming.  I quit messing with the hassle of dns unblocking MLB.TV and just quit watching altogether.  

If this is region unrestricted content and tier 3/4 then it is hot garbage.  
Click to expand...
 It will have to include all of the stuff that normally is nationally televised on ABC and all of the ESPN networks as well, right? I assume it will be more than $10/mo. If they are going to do this why not include all of their stuff? 

If it's just the bolded plus a bunch of stuff from the ESPN8 The Ocho thread it seems like a waste of time, even though they will probably get my money because I am a sucker for random sports. 

 
Moe. said:
 It will have to include all of the stuff that normally is nationally televised on ABC and all of the ESPN networks as well, right? I assume it will be more than $10/mo. If they are going to do this why not include all of their stuff? 

If it's just the bolded plus a bunch of stuff from the ESPN8 The Ocho thread it seems like a waste of time, even though they will probably get my money because I am a sucker for random sports. 
Click to expand...
Because they don't have the right to charge for them (it's why the watchESPN app is "free" to paying subscribers).   These rights agreements are fairly specific on how they games have to be distributed.  

As near as I can tell, this service will have access to out of market MLB and NHL games, the ACC and SEC network material, PGA Golf, a bunch of soccer related stuff (though it's not clear what that is exactly), and other random one-off-events like the world cricket championship (for which they had 100K subscribers at $100 a pop).  So your basic pu-pu platter. 

As it's currently constructed, it almost has to remain an a la carte service per sport in order to maintain the margins (i.e. MLB people are already paying $9.99 a month and then if you through the NHL in, you're already looking at $14.99 a month or so to maintain margins).    

 
Michael Smith & jamele, Jamal, JoJo, or whatever her name is...just pathetic ESPN allows these 2 clowns to lead off sportscenter, let alone have jobs. I turn on to see scores & highlights (I know my mistake) and I have to listen to their views about injustices of various kinds. Its becoming nearly impossible to enjoy sports now with cry babies from every end of the universe.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SwampDawg
The College Soccer Experience
Replies
23
Views
931
BassNBrew
BassNBrew
Chadstroma
Prime (not Amazon)
Replies
5
Views
450
Chadstroma
Chadstroma
rockaction
Argumentum Ad Personam - An Explanation of the Fallacy and Its Tactical Use
2
Replies
55
Views
2K
Terminalxylem
Terminalxylem

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top