Cutting the cable and phones are burying ESPN.

Credit where credit is due. Way to go millennials you're slaying the beast.  

"Today, what a 60-year-old man expects out of sports - which is probably still the local newspaper and SportsCenter on ESPN - is really different than what the 16-year-old expects. Which is probably behind-the-scenes, authentic views into an athlete's life on Snapchat, plus using Team Stream to get news and content, plus using Instagram to get really cool social stuff to share with friends. I think ESPN has had a hard time. It's tough to cater to both audiences and I think they've gotten stuck in the middle a little on that."

http://www.businessinsider.com/bleacher-report-ceo-says-why-espn-has-had-trouble-2016-8

I agree with just about everything that guy said, except the age thing, unless you swap 70 for his 60.

Floyd Robertson wrote:I agree with just about everything that guy said, except the age thing, unless you swap 70 for his 60.

Yeah, I'm mid fifty and I use the Internet for 95% of my sports info. Can't remember the last time I watched sports center. I do still read Thursday Friday Sunday newspaper on the shitter.

Millennials don't care about hard work, playing golf, or watching ESPN. There heads are stuck in their phones all day long. Just ask my two girls. It's all snapchat, selfies, etc etc.

DWags wrote:

Floyd Robertson wrote:I agree with just about everything that guy said, except the age thing, unless you swap 70 for his 60.

Yeah, I'm mid fifty and I use the Internet for 95% of my sports info. Can't remember the last time I watched sports center. I do still read Thursday Friday Sunday newspaper on the shitter.

I never watch it either.

DWags wrote:

Floyd Robertson wrote:I agree with just about everything that guy said, except the age thing, unless you swap 70 for his 60.

Yeah, I'm mid fifty and I use the Internet for 95% of my sports info. Can't remember the last time I watched sports center. I do still read Thursday Friday Sunday newspaper on the shitter.

The internet is 20 years old. A persons age is not really a valid argument anymore for whether or not they use it.

Only watch ESPN if there's a game on

It's not really about how I get my news - it's about how much I do not give a fuck what any of the "experts" or anyone on ESPN says. Slowly realize it's really just white noise and the narrative will change as the games do. Just watch it for the games like CB.

God the RCMB his horrible. so many hypersensitive sissies

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:It's not really about how I get my news - it's about how much I do not give a fuck what any of the "experts" or anyone on ESPN says. Slowly realize it's really just white noise and the narrative will change as the games do. Just watch it for the games like CB.

This these experts don't know anymore than the rest of us.

CORNER BLITZ wrote:Only watch ESPN if there's a game on

Me too.

On nice fall days I rely on NBC Sunday Night highlights and don't bother watching the Sunday night game.

Find myself going to CBS Sports website and avoiding ESPN on the web too.

aualum06 wrote:

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:It's not really about how I get my news - it's about how much I do not give a fuck what any of the "experts" or anyone on ESPN says. Slowly realize it's really just white noise and the narrative will change as the games do. Just watch it for the games like CB.

This these experts don't know anymore than the rest of us.

When I was a kid I would hang on every word of those drunk fucks in the booth or studio. The transparency of today's social media has made these clowns useless.

ESPN will reportedly undergo “significant” layoffs in the coming months

Back in 2015, ESPN cut an estimated 300 jobs from its roster. It was mainly due to increased rights fees and reduced sales revenue. Sports Illustrated reports that the Worldwide Leader will be undergoing a new set of layoffs over the next four months. The exact number is not known at this time, but SI reports that it will be “significant.”

In February, ESPN’s parent company Disney reported its first quarter earnings and they fell short of expectations. Much of the revenue shortfall came from its media networks and once again ESPN’s higher programming costs along with lower sales revenue were cited as the main reasons.

Richard Deitsch writes that “ESPN has been tasked with paring tens of millions of staff salary from its payroll, including staffers many viewers and readers will recognize,” meaning that these cuts will be on the talent side. In addition to the layoffs of existing on-air talent, there will be buyouts of some contracts. SI adds that the buyouts are rare so this is new territory for ESPN.

I still watch ESPN but mostly just for actual games or top 10 highlights.

ESPN also killed espn when it decided it would like to treat sports like pop culture and focus on the drama stories and the tebows and the other shit that no one cares about. Truth be told, if they had more shows like that one on Sunday mornings where they actually break down football film and talk about football strategy and stuff and less shows where they talk about which athlete is fucking who, I would probably watch more.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:ESPN also killed espn when it decided it would like to treat sports like pop culture and focus on the drama stories and the tebows and the other shit that no one cares about. Truth be told, if they had more shows like that one on Sunday mornings where they actually break down football film and talk about football strategy and stuff and less shows where they talk about which athlete is fucking who, I would probably watch more.

It would be interesting to see what % of SportsCenter were actual sports highlights 10 years ago compared to today.

One of the only ESPN shows I like is SVP late night.

DWags wrote:Credit where credit is due. Way to go millennials you're slaying the beast.  

"Today, what a 60-year-old man expects out of sports - which is probably still the local newspaper and SportsCenter on ESPN - is really different than what the 16-year-old expects. Which is probably behind-the-scenes, authentic views into an athlete's life on Snapchat, plus using Team Stream to get news and content, plus using Instagram to get really cool social stuff to share with friends. I think ESPN has had a hard time. It's tough to cater to both audiences and I think they've gotten stuck in the middle a little on that."

http://www.businessinsider.com/bleacher-report-ceo-says-why-espn-has-had-trouble-2016-8

To be fair, the article is about an interview with the Bleacher Report CEO. Not to say that ESPN is great by any means (I almost never watch it outside of games myself), or even that it's not in decline, but his quotes are also very self-serving, and as was pointed out, pretty much wrong with the age.

It's kind of ironic that someone who is head of a digital company that tries to be forward thinking and keeping up with the latest trends, would still be stuck using generalities from 10-20 years ago (i.e., 60 year olds, just watch ESPN and read the newspaper). I'm surprised he didn't add in that the 60 year olds can't set the clock on their VCRs.

ESPN management has been throwing out billions for exclusive rights like college bowl week. They pay the NFL more money than the CBS, Fox or NBC for fewer games and the league has a competing network for all the "insider" stuff.

I read a few months ago that if ESPN customer losses dropped to pre-streaming numbers when the only competition for your eyes was satellite and HBO/Showtime, they still would be hemorrhaging cash by 2020 if they didn't re-negotiate their rights contracts to manageable amounts.

Hindsight shows that for those younger viewers who grew up with ESPN/ESPN2/ESPNU and ESPN News and use smartphones for their news/information don't care if they aren't home to watch UNC/Duke. They'll catch the result from some website and watch highlights on YouTube .

My tinfoil hat is telling me Disney may go into business with YouTube (owned by Alphabet fka Google) . YouTube TV gives Disney a wad of cash up front for the rights to all the ESPN channels plus their Disney TV now called FreeForm upfront to take on Sony, Amazon, Hulu and Netflix. They have around $10B in cash and hold over $70B in stock that can be changed into cash quickly.

Disney finds a solution for their problem child that's draining cash while YouTube TV gets a leg up on its competitors right out of the gate.

Another article on the continuing decline.

ESPN Cutting Nearly $100 Million In On-Air Talent

Anyone but LeBatard.

They've been cutting on-air talent for awhile now.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:ESPN also killed espn when it decided it would like to treat sports like pop culture and focus on the drama stories and the tebows and the other shit that no one cares about. Truth be told, if they had more shows like that one on Sunday mornings where they actually break down football film and talk about football strategy and stuff and less shows where they talk about which athlete is fucking who, I would probably watch more.

Isn't that all they do is talk NFL and breakdown film with Jaws and other insiders?  I'd rather watch the E360 or 30:30 pieces. Some of those are pretty good, and I don't think that is what is killing the network.  Cable cutting and streaming (which is easy to pirate and hard to monetize) is killing the cable networks.

Overall, I don't get all the ESPN hate.  They bring a shitload of college football & hoops games to your living room and they do it very well. I don't watch SC or the 100 NFL breakdown shows or the talking head shows. But I do watch games and they do college football/hoops better than anyone, hands down (CBS hoops is good too).  I'll hit the ESPN website for scores and stats because it is the easiest to navigate, but don't listen to ESPN radio.

If ESPN fails and college football gets pushed to the networks it will be a chaotic shit show.  Enjoy watching Notre Dame on NBC like the 70s. Obviously that is a bit of hyperbole, but network TV is not going to be snapping up the rights to broadcast Georgia Tech vs. Virginia. And if it goes to another sports network link NBCSN or CBSSports, WTF is the difference? You think the experience will be better?

Their money issues are not my problem to solve, but I'm definitely not rooting for them to fail like many seem to be. Be careful what you wish for.

ESPN isn't the victim of hate. Their business model is no longer viable and they keep shoveling cash into rights fees like its 2010.

WhenESPN began kicking ass and taking names most of us didn't have internet connections and it was a decade before iPhone and then its Android competitors came to market. Before Netflix was mailing CD's and Blockbuster was the buzz for home entertanment

A lot of things have changed except ESPN has kept doing business like the good old days when they could raise prices and we'd all grit our teeth and pay.

My kid, recent MSU grad has a good friend who works for ESPN's web division. A small fish in a big pond doing 200-300 word MLB and NBA stories.

A month ago word came about a promotion to cover home stands for MLB teams in the Midwest. Basically what was done remotely with a ESPN issued laptop and cell phone to filming interviews etc at the events formthe web site.

That job was supposed to start a week ago. Still on the payroll but the HR people who did the inhouse interviews are all MIA. I suspect Disney has a big broom and no one is safe.

I guess wed just have to agree to disagree there. I would rarely watch some 30 for 30 or whatever show about a team that I don't care about. I just won't. It's boring, similar to sitting and watching a game between two teams I don't care about. Not likely to watch. I will watch highlights though. Or honest, quality, analysis (provided it isn't like a 3 hour breakdown of one play) that skips over some commentary about which teammates are in a fight about locker room Xbox usage and only talks about the sports.

I think the best thing espn could do is accept that they aren't going to be at the top of the cable ratings pile 100% of the time. How much do you suppose they pay to have some of those radio shows on in the morning? Or that show with that one loudmouth guy? How much did they pay to have the same hour long show play 6 times in a row in the morning back in the day? How much better are the ratings now and is it worth it? I'd probably consider going back to airing the same show over and over again, but I don't have nearly enough info to make that decision.

GRR Spartan wrote:ESPN isn't the victim of hate.  Their business model is no longer viable and they keep shoveling cash into rights fees like its 2010.

I agree.

I just don't get all (or most) of the hate. People like to hate on what is popular. Hate on Stephen A. Smith or Chris Berman... hate on rising cable fees... whatever.  But some seem to be rooting for the network to fail. And if it does a lot college football and hoops fans will be quickly disappointed.  The level of coverage and production will take a severe hit.

ESPN is the department store of cable networks and is suffering the same fate.

We can bitch about their programming and on air talent. Most of us can agree, as shown in the link Goose provided, that the have spent way too much for rights fees. Especially to the NFL that has its own cable/online channel.

But like Sears the sun is setting on their business model. They are fighting different viewing habits, different viewer sports interest in general, technology that allows anyone with a smartphone to get scores and highlights and the worst thing, ESPN doesn't have exclusives.

Why did we all watch SportsCenter at 11:00? It was entertaing, filled with highlights and it was the only game in town.

Not any more.

Nordic wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:ESPN also killed espn when it decided it would like to treat sports like pop culture and focus on the drama stories and the tebows and the other shit that no one cares about. Truth be told, if they had more shows like that one on Sunday mornings where they actually break down football film and talk about football strategy and stuff and less shows where they talk about which athlete is fucking who, I would probably watch more.

Isn't that all they do is talk NFL and breakdown film with Jaws and other insiders?  I'd rather watch the E360 or 30:30 pieces. Some of those are pretty good, and I don't think that is what is killing the network.  Cable cutting and streaming (which is easy to pirate and hard to monetize) is killing the cable networks.

Overall, I don't get all the ESPN hate.  They bring a shitload of college football & hoops games to your living room and they do it very well. I don't watch SC or the 100 NFL breakdown shows or the talking head shows. But I do watch games and they do college football/hoops better than anyone, hands down (CBS hoops is good too).  I'll hit the ESPN website for scores and stats because it is the easiest to navigate, but don't listen to ESPN radio.

If ESPN fails and college football gets pushed to the networks it will be a chaotic shit show.  Enjoy watching Notre Dame on NBC like the 70s. Obviously that is a bit of hyperbole, but network TV is not going to be snapping up the rights to broadcast Georgia Tech vs. Virginia. And if it goes to another sports network link NBCSN or CBSSports, WTF is the difference? You think the experience will be better?

Their money issues are not my problem to solve, but I'm definitely not rooting for them to fail like many seem to be. Be careful what you wish for.

The big dog will always get a lot of hate, just like with teams. Neutrals will usually hate Alabama, the Patriots, etc.

I'd also add to your points that Watch ESPN is, for me at least, blows away everyone else's streaming. To be fair, CBS's streaming for March Madness has always been good. And Fox and NBC have improved a lot in reliability over the last couple of years. ESPN's streams are pretty consistent, and I especially like how they keep the games online so you can watch the replay. The replay availability on other networks' sites is very limited.

I don't have a problem with them in general, because they do provide access to a shit ton of games. I don't watch most of the shows. My only complaint about their coverage (in game or studio) is that they put more of an emphasis on personality than knowledge when it comes to the announcers or studio guys. I know you can't have the most knowledgeable person on TV if they are dull and sheepish, and I know that personalities help bring and keep viewers, even if people hate what they say. But it also leads to guys trying to be controversial for the sake of attention (Dakich) and idiot homers (Holtz and Desmond), so that gets annoying. It obviously works, though, because Fox has tried to emulate this.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:ESPN also killed espn when it decided it would like to treat sports like pop culture and focus on the drama stories and the tebows and the other shit that no one cares about. Truth be told, if they had more shows like that one on Sunday mornings where they actually break down football film and talk about football strategy and stuff and less shows where they talk about which athlete is fucking who, I would probably watch more.

this. tebow killed espn

MiamiSpartan wrote:

Nordic wrote:

Isn't that all they do is talk NFL and breakdown film with Jaws and other insiders?  I'd rather watch the E360 or 30:30 pieces. Some of those are pretty good, and I don't think that is what is killing the network.  Cable cutting and streaming (which is easy to pirate and hard to monetize) is killing the cable networks.

Overall, I don't get all the ESPN hate.  They bring a shitload of college football & hoops games to your living room and they do it very well. I don't watch SC or the 100 NFL breakdown shows or the talking head shows. But I do watch games and they do college football/hoops better than anyone, hands down (CBS hoops is good too).  I'll hit the ESPN website for scores and stats because it is the easiest to navigate, but don't listen to ESPN radio.

If ESPN fails and college football gets pushed to the networks it will be a chaotic shit show.  Enjoy watching Notre Dame on NBC like the 70s. Obviously that is a bit of hyperbole, but network TV is not going to be snapping up the rights to broadcast Georgia Tech vs. Virginia. And if it goes to another sports network link NBCSN or CBSSports, WTF is the difference? You think the experience will be better?

Their money issues are not my problem to solve, but I'm definitely not rooting for them to fail like many seem to be. Be careful what you wish for.

The big dog will always get a lot of hate, just like with teams. Neutrals will usually hate Alabama, the Patriots, etc.

I'd also add to your points that Watch ESPN is, for me at least, blows away everyone else's streaming. To be fair, CBS's streaming for March Madness has always been good. And Fox and NBC have improved a lot in reliability over the last couple of years. ESPN's streams are pretty consistent, and I especially like how they keep the games online so you can watch the replay. The replay availability on other networks' sites is very limited.

I don't have a problem with them in general, because they do provide access to a shit ton of games. I don't watch most of the shows. My only complaint about their coverage (in game or studio) is that they put more of an emphasis on personality than knowledge when it comes to the announcers or studio guys. I know you can't have the most knowledgeable person on TV if they are dull and sheepish, and I know that personalities help bring and keep viewers, even if people hate what they say. But it also leads to guys trying to be controversial for the sake of attention (Dakich) and idiot homers (Holtz and Desmond), so that gets annoying. It obviously works, though, because Fox has tried to emulate this.

espn s hail mary is jemele hill. let that sink in.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:I guess wed just have to agree to disagree there. I would rarely watch some 30 for 30 or whatever show about a team that I don't care about. I just won't. It's boring, similar to sitting and watching a game between two teams I don't care about. Not likely to watch. I will watch highlights though. Or honest, quality, analysis (provided it isn't like a 3 hour breakdown of one play) that skips over some commentary about which teammates are in a fight about locker room Xbox usage and only talks about the sports.

I think the best thing espn could do is accept that they aren't going to be at the top of the cable ratings pile 100% of the time. How much do you suppose they pay to have some of those radio shows on in the morning? Or that show with that one loudmouth guy? How much did they pay to have the same hour long show play 6 times in a row in the morning back in the day? How much better are the ratings now and is it worth it? I'd probably consider going back to airing the same show over and over again, but I don't have nearly enough info to make that decision.

Travis, you should check out the E:60 episode about Arthur the dog. I cried Travis... I cried.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXWJGhWPuzk

MiamiSpartan wrote:

Nordic wrote:

Isn't that all they do is talk NFL and breakdown film with Jaws and other insiders?  I'd rather watch the E360 or 30:30 pieces. Some of those are pretty good, and I don't think that is what is killing the network.  Cable cutting and streaming (which is easy to pirate and hard to monetize) is killing the cable networks.

Overall, I don't get all the ESPN hate.  They bring a shitload of college football & hoops games to your living room and they do it very well. I don't watch SC or the 100 NFL breakdown shows or the talking head shows. But I do watch games and they do college football/hoops better than anyone, hands down (CBS hoops is good too).  I'll hit the ESPN website for scores and stats because it is the easiest to navigate, but don't listen to ESPN radio.

If ESPN fails and college football gets pushed to the networks it will be a chaotic shit show.  Enjoy watching Notre Dame on NBC like the 70s. Obviously that is a bit of hyperbole, but network TV is not going to be snapping up the rights to broadcast Georgia Tech vs. Virginia. And if it goes to another sports network link NBCSN or CBSSports, WTF is the difference? You think the experience will be better?

Their money issues are not my problem to solve, but I'm definitely not rooting for them to fail like many seem to be. Be careful what you wish for.

The big dog will always get a lot of hate, just like with teams. Neutrals will usually hate Alabama, the Patriots, etc.

I'd also add to your points that Watch ESPN is, for me at least, blows away everyone else's streaming. To be fair, CBS's streaming for March Madness has always been good. And Fox and NBC have improved a lot in reliability over the last couple of years. ESPN's streams are pretty consistent, and I especially like how they keep the games online so you can watch the replay. The replay availability on other networks' sites is very limited.

I don't have a problem with them in general, because they do provide access to a shit ton of games. I don't watch most of the shows. My only complaint about their coverage (in game or studio) is that they put more of an emphasis on personality than knowledge when it comes to the announcers or studio guys. I know you can't have the most knowledgeable person on TV if they are dull and sheepish, and I know that personalities help bring and keep viewers, even if people hate what they say. But it also leads to guys trying to be controversial for the sake of attention (Dakich) and idiot homers (Holtz and Desmond), so that gets annoying. It obviously works, though, because Fox has tried to emulate this.

WatchESPN is the shit when you are degen betting on Middle Tennessee State football games.

Looking at the numbers has convinced me ESPN might be something Disney is willing to sell. The predicted cuts are a prelude to selling so the new owner isn't going to be inheriting on air, production and administrative salaries.

Alphabet (what used to be called Google) has already announced YouTube TV streaming channel. They buy the ESPN portion from Disney. Disney keeps ABC and its Disney entertainment channel(s) and agrees to keep broadcasting college football and golf that have been part of ABC programming provided by ESPN.

YouTube TV gets a lot of programming and will get rights fees to offset the purchase price.

Nordic wrote:

GRR Spartan wrote:ESPN isn't the victim of hate.  Their business model is no longer viable and they keep shoveling cash into rights fees like its 2010.

I agree.

I just don't get all (or most) of the hate. People like to hate on what is popular. Hate on Stephen A. Smith or Chris Berman... hate on rising cable fees... whatever.  But some seem to be rooting for the network to fail. And if it does a lot college football and hoops fans will be quickly disappointed.  The level of coverage and production will take a severe hit.

It'll move to the conference networks. Whatever games aren't big enough for the Big4 will stay with BTN.

GRR Spartan wrote:Looking at the numbers has convinced me ESPN might be something Disney is willing to sell. The predicted cuts are a prelude to selling so the new owner isn't going to be inheriting on air, production and administrative salaries.

Alphabet (what used to be called Google) has already announced YouTube TV streaming channel. They buy the ESPN portion from Disney. Disney keeps ABC and its Disney entertainment channel(s) and agrees to keep broadcasting college football and golf that have been part of ABC programming provided by ESPN.

YouTube TV gets a lot of programming and will get rights fees to offset the purchase price.

yea, you definitely don't know business....

LooseGoose wrote:

Nordic wrote:

I agree.

I just don't get all (or most) of the hate. People like to hate on what is popular. Hate on Stephen A. Smith or Chris Berman... hate on rising cable fees... whatever.  But some seem to be rooting for the network to fail. And if it does a lot college football and hoops fans will be quickly disappointed.  The level of coverage and production will take a severe hit.

It'll move to the conference networks. Whatever games aren't big enough for the Big4 will stay with BTN.

I ve watched a lot of espn3 games and there's a noticible production quality drop for some small school games but mid size schools are usually good but I don't really gaf, I just want the games. I actually was watching a college hockey game on ESPN a month or so ago and it didn't have commentating for the first 20 minutes and it was amazing. Wish that was an option for all sports.
ESPN has so much dead weight in my opinion, paying people like Desmond, Dukie V and Mowins is mind bottling. I mean Dan Murphy gets paid to live in AA, sniff Harboogers ass and write shit articles. Now if we switch to having a bigger conference network I ll have to inform Lisa Byington she can cover MSU full time for the network and live with me

All of them will change the way they do things. It's absurd that I'm in MLB's blackout from the Tigers. MLB/FSD could make a deal and let me buy the programming, both of them would make more $$ off me than they do now.

LooseGoose wrote:All of them will change the way they do things. It's absurd that I'm in MLB's blackout from the Tigers. MLB/FSD could make a deal and let me buy the programming, both of them would make more $$ off me than they do now.

Find an account that gets FSD to login with. Fox sports go can now stream FSD.

MattyFresh wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

It'll move to the conference networks. Whatever games aren't big enough for the Big4 will stay with BTN.

I ve watched a lot of espn3 games and there's a noticible production quality drop for some small school games but mid size schools are usually good but I don't really gaf, I just want the games. I actually was watching a college hockey game on ESPN a month or so ago and it didn't have commentating for the first 20 minutes and it was amazing. Wish that was an option for all sports.
ESPN has so much dead weight in my opinion, paying people like Desmond, Dukie V and Mowins is mind bottling. I mean Dan Murphy gets paid to live in AA, sniff Harboogers ass and write shit articles. Now if we switch to having a bigger conference network I ll have to inform Lisa Byington she can cover MSU full time for the network and live with me

That's great when that happens. There was a soccer game I was watching a couple of years ago where this happened. Announcers cut out, but stadium sound was still there. Lasted for most of a half. Intense game, with a good atmosphere, too, so that all carried through that much better without announcers.

ESPN Expects to Part with 100 Sports Journalists in Content Strategy Shift

ESPN expects to part ways with 100 of its sports journalists  as the Walt Disney sports media juggernaut places more focus on its rejiggered “SportsCenter” lineup as well as digital  content associated with that program.

A person familiar with the situation said those employees will come from the ranks of on-air talent as well as people devoted to producing reports for its print and online outlets. Already, Paul Kuharsky, a nine-year ESPN veteran who has covered the Tennessee Titans and southeastern NFL teams, indicated via Twitter that he did not expect his current contract to be renewed when it expires in July.

I can't go back to anchoring local sports. I can't. I won't.