Disney to spin off ESPN? (1 Viewer)

Tampa8

Thread Starter
Supporting Founder
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Sep 8, 2003
17,938
7,373
Tampa/Eastern Ct
ESPN could be owned and distributed by someone else speculation perhaps Apple. (Though everyone always mentions Apple in these things) There are so many here who have chided ESPN's cost and I think the chickens are coming home to roost. They already have been cutting back tremendously and now they are actually hurting the Disney bottom line. I have zero empathy for ESPN for many reasons including so many of their on air personalities
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/10/libe...sibly-spinning-off-espn.html?__source=Twitter
 

jerryez

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Sep 8, 2003
4,368
825
Pensacola,FL
Those three guys that come on at 3:30PM Central with the vote in Spanish ie: Si and NO. We call them the Bobble Heads. ESPN has way too many talk shows that say nothing. The five guys at four seem to be arguing instead of discussing.
 

osu1991

SatelliteGuys Master
Sep 4, 2004
9,905
2,339
Broken Arrow, Oklahoma
Other than a game or two a week. I stopped watching years ago. 12hr loops of sports center or the stupid shock talk types shows are of no interest to me. Be of more interest to me if they moved all that junk to ESPN 3 and actually televised the games that get pushed to espn3.
 

Annie61

SatelliteGuys Pro
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Dec 14, 2008
2,701
999
Agawam Ma
Does the NFL ratings collapse really hurt ESPN or would that hurt FOX more? I think there are just way too many ESPN channels, too much time to fill with not enough content.
 

Tampa8

Thread Starter
Supporting Founder
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Sep 8, 2003
17,938
7,373
Tampa/Eastern Ct
I believe ESPN is having multiple problems. They have decided to take a political stance, (I won't of course go into detail here) they rely on the NFL (as others do) and the NFL is having a multitude of problems including with the Commissioner. Bottom line, enough people don't care about ESPN as much as in the past, and are able to get packages without it now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Annie61 and fred555

sam_gordon

SatelliteGuys Pro
May 21, 2009
2,187
977
Lexington, ky
ESPN has ONE NFL game a week. While I'm sure the league's ratings drop has some influence, I don't think it's going to be a big one. Too many channels, not enough content, high payouts for the rights to leagues/games, the millions they just put into upgrading their studios recently, plus cord cutters have more to do with it IMO.
 

Juan

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Sep 14, 2003
26,150
5,692
Moscow Russia
ESPN has ONE NFL game a week. While I'm sure the league's ratings drop has some influence, I don't think it's going to be a big one. Too many channels, not enough content, high payouts for the rights to leagues/games, the millions they just put into upgrading their studios recently, plus cord cutters have more to do with it IMO.
They have a boatload of NFL related programming..so yes it does

Sent from my SM-G920V using the SatelliteGuys app!
 
  • Like
Reactions: harshness

The Fat Man

Poster of Randomness
Lifetime Supporter
Oct 2, 2010
8,728
6,484
Land where we pronounce our "R" as "ah"
It's my same ire toward anything sports talk. The majority of sports talk personalities on tv and radio are nothing more than high school water boys who are good at writing and talking. For every former athlete or coach who now provides in game commentary, there are 15 people who just never played the game, discussing it on useless levels. I really don't care what the guy who's in at 3:00 has to say about Tom Brady's pass percentage rating.

It's the same issue with Liberal and Conservative media, and celebrities. At the end of the day, I don't care about your opinions on politics. The jobs of all previously identified groups needs to be presenting facts. That's it. At the end of the day, I really don't care what any of their opinions on either topic matters to me. Shut up, tell me what happened. Save your opinions for your own private conversations with your families, friends, and colleagues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Annie61

Radioguy41

SatelliteGuys Pro
Aug 7, 2008
2,016
1,516
Lehighton, PA
With the exception of if the Packers are playing a Monday night game the only time I turn on ESPN is for the College Softball World Series but even then I have to mute Beth Mowins, she just never shuts up. That never shutting up, I think, has more to do with the drop in ratings then anything else, with the possible exception of the NFL's abysmal officiating. Once upon a time you could enjoy a football (or baseball) game on TV with just one announcer in the booth. After all, it's visual, we can see what's happening. Then they added a color commentator, then a 2nd one, then a sideline commentator, then some slug roaming in the stands and then the most ridiculous of all, in baseball they interview players and coaches during the game! Bottom line is the game has become secondary to the talk show/discussion group mentality and that's killing them. Interesting story, while listening to a baseball game on the radio this Summer they had a TV guy fill in the the 2nd guy in the booth who was away that night. Still only 2 people in the booth but the interesting part was the comment the TV guy made when asked afterwards what it was like doing radio. His reply was "You guys talk a lot less over here.". Imagine, you can understand what's going on in the game on radio, where you can't see what's happening, with significantly less talking than on TV. So I resort to muting Troy Aikman, Phil Simms, Beth Mowins, Rick Sutcliffe, and others in order to watch the game. Now if they would just stop inserting homeruns the guy hit last game, last week, last month, last year, to the point where you're not sure what's current and what is a replay/flashback you might just be able to actually follow along. Imagine, you're watching a game and Miggy is coming up next so you dash out to the kitchen to grab something to drink and as you walk back in you see this long HR leaving the park. Wow, he hit another HR, only to find out seconds later that it was a replay of the one he hit earlier in the game. What the....!?? This behaviour, sadly, is not confined to ESPN alone - nobody knows how to televise a game any more.

I think too that ESPN has lost sight of what they're supposed to be about. They rely on sports for a living yet the majority of their programming over the past few years has become anti-sports, starting with Outside The Lines. The ever increasing negativity is a major factor, in my opinion, for the decline in viewership. For instance, whatever you think of Pete Rose, he is the greatest hitter to ever play the game and after 25 years deserved a fair shot at reinstatement. ESPN, however, went out of it's way, via OTL, to destroy that opportunity. That's not ESPN's job but is a textbook example of where the corporate mindset is. It's yellow journalism at it's worst. You might call it "Biting the hand that feeds you.". Just my $.02.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Annie61 and Tampa8

osu1991

SatelliteGuys Master
Sep 4, 2004
9,905
2,339
Broken Arrow, Oklahoma
Don't forget all the annoying on screen clutter. Constant running bottom line with junk no one is interested in or onscreen graphics like the strike zone box during baseball and softball games.
 

Radioguy41

SatelliteGuys Pro
Aug 7, 2008
2,016
1,516
Lehighton, PA
Yeah, did you take notice Fox didn't use the strike zone box except on replays during the WS. Interesting. Pressure from viewers or pressure from MLB? After the debacle earlier in the playoffs where the one umpire was calling every pitch in the far side batters box a strike I suspect MLB put on the pressure.
 

Tampa8

Thread Starter
Supporting Founder
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Sep 8, 2003
17,938
7,373
Tampa/Eastern Ct
Yeah, did you take notice Fox didn't use the strike zone box except on replays during the WS. Interesting. Pressure from viewers or pressure from MLB? After the debacle earlier in the playoffs where the one umpire was calling every pitch in the far side batters box a strike I suspect MLB put on the pressure.

I will say, imho the officiating in Baseball is better than the other major sports(Maybe equal to Hockey) sometimes by a mile.
 

Tampa8

Thread Starter
Supporting Founder
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Sep 8, 2003
17,938
7,373
Tampa/Eastern Ct
.... Now if they would just stop inserting homeruns the guy hit last game, last week, last month, last year, to the point where you're not sure what's current and what is a replay/flashback you might just be able to actually follow along. Imagine, you're watching a game and Miggy is coming up next so you dash out to the kitchen to grab something to drink and as you walk back in you see this long HR leaving the park. Wow, he hit another HR, only to find out seconds later that it was a replay of the one he hit earlier in the game. What the....!?? This behaviour, sadly, is not confined to ESPN alone - nobody knows how to televise a game any more.
Agree agree agree. I have been fooled a few times. Also agree with general comments about ESPN.
 

Radioguy41

SatelliteGuys Pro
Aug 7, 2008
2,016
1,516
Lehighton, PA
I will say, imho the officiating in Baseball is better than the other major sports(Maybe equal to Hockey) sometimes by a mile.
Since replay reviews were instituted only 24% of the reviewed calls have been confirmed as correct, 28% were allowed to stand, and 48% were overturned because they were wrong. That means less than 25% were confirmed as being correct. Being allowed to stand simply means there wasn't enough conclusive evidence to overturn even though it was questionable, and 48% were outright wrong. And that doesn't take into account some of the truely incompetent ball and strike calling, something that has seriously deteriorated since umpires started standing off to one side of the catcher. There's no way you can stand off to one side and expect to accurately call outside pitches on the other side. Not knocking your opinion but thought I'd post the statistics to ponder. :)
 

Tampa8

Thread Starter
Supporting Founder
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Sep 8, 2003
17,938
7,373
Tampa/Eastern Ct
Since replay reviews were instituted only 24% of the reviewed calls have been confirmed as correct, 28% were allowed to stand, and 48% were overturned because they were wrong. That means less than 25% were confirmed as being correct. Being allowed to stand simply means there wasn't enough conclusive evidence to overturn even though it was questionable, and 48% were outright wrong. And that doesn't take into account some of the truely incompetent ball and strike calling, something that has seriously deteriorated since umpires started standing off to one side of the catcher. There's no way you can stand off to one side and expect to accurately call outside pitches on the other side. Not knocking your opinion but thought I'd post the statistics to ponder. :)

Not knocking at all, good stats. From watching alot of baseball it seems to me a good percentage of calls that are wrong come from calls that are simply too close for an umpire to necessarily get right. (The Bang Bang plays) Looking in real time I often think they got it right it's only in super slow motion you can see it was wrong - or inconclusive. Of course they do get some obvious ones wrong too. When it comes to balls and strikes I believe in what is often said, the Umpire being consistent may be more important than the actual strike zone.
 

dare2be

SatelliteGuys God
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 15, 2011
12,657
7,520
FL
I have zero empathy for ESPN for many reasons including so many of their on air personalities
Mine is the irresponsible spending on exclusive league contracts in the billions of dollars that was never going to be sustainable in the long run. They made their bed now they need to lie in it.

I'm glad I'm not feeding that pig anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheKrell and Tampa8

Users who are viewing this thread

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Top