OT: Jeremy Crabtree Out at ESPN
- Thread starter RChrisReade
- Start date
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
I feel bad for these people, but this has been coming for some time. ESPN made some horrible business decisions, and then decided to be political. Bad combo.
I'm not sure that ESPN is losing a ton of viewers
where they are getting killed is all the alternative ways to have access to TV shows
5-10 years ago people who had no interest in sports had to pay for a cable package that included ESPN in order to have access to all the other channels that they valued ... that scenario and business model is now on the way out .. perhaps ESPN was late to react
it was a genius business model .... bundling packages so that people with no interest in sports still had to pay for the package that included ESPN ... that model is now becoming obsolete and ESPN is reacting accordingly
I get that ESPN is trying to go more digital and probably try and hire younger people, but that is just complete **** for guys like Crabtree, McMurphy and now Kannel. I haven't been able to watch ESPN longer than 25 minutes anymore without getting bombarded with political sports hot takes.
FOX Sports needs to get on top of this immediately. I recently switched my viewing habits from ESPN to FOX in the past year. Content is getting better and better, on-air personalities are good and they give me what I want: SPORTS. I'd also add that the FOX Sports app has been by and far the best addition to my phone. I hope FOX picks up some of these guys because they produce good content.
FOX Sports needs to get on top of this immediately. I recently switched my viewing habits from ESPN to FOX in the past year. Content is getting better and better, on-air personalities are good and they give me what I want: SPORTS. I'd also add that the FOX Sports app has been by and far the best addition to my phone. I hope FOX picks up some of these guys because they produce good content.
if you are paying for a cable package that includes both FOX and ESPN, despite your viewing habits more of your money is going to ESPN than FOX because the cable company is paying ESPN a lot more (a lot more) than FOX for the rights to carry their network
But the way that the story is leaking on Deadspin helps tell part of the story of why ESPN can cut payroll: just publishing the tweets as they come out. No in-depth analysis or connections needed. No pounding the bricks. Just copy and paste the tweets. http://deadspin.com/a-running-list-of-espn-layoffs-1794664091
Sports has been a soap opera for years. And likely will be, no matter what outlet survives.
There's only so many times you can talk about yet another player that outworks all the rest, or so many times you can break down that the key to the game is TO's.
All the other fluff is bread and circuses to fill in the time. They serve a much larger audience now than males who are just tuning in to see some highlights and stats.
Edit: And has been posted, much of what passes for sports news can just be retweeted.
Yep. I watched their 6 PM sports center once since they re-did it. Couldn't finish it, I really don't give a damn about the feelings of the sports center anchors on every topic that comes through for the day. Shocked those two were not on this list.
Getting lots more done around the house in the evenings, though!
be very interested to see if the demographics of the recent firings match the overall demographics of the organization or of the recent hires
Sports Center in the morning is almost unwatchable now.
Seems most of that running list is 5 years less experience with a couple of guys getting up into that 8,9 and 13 range.
Did not know this but that's good info. However, I actually don't pay for extra packages—I don't even pay for an HD package; I just get the most basic TV channels up to about 27 or so. Because of this, I often get my ESPN content from espn.com watching snippet videos and highlights. When I'm at a friends house, my parents or anywhere else that has those channels, that's when I just can't stand watching ESPN anymore. Instead, I get FOX content from the app on my phone. It's much more easy and customizable for your favorite teams than the ESPN app. My viewing habits are why I can kind of understand why they are letting a lot of these guys go, because digital is starting to get more and more traction.
Just looking around the sports world web right now, it really does appear that all of the anchors who did the hard work producing good content to listen to are being let off, and the soap opera, big mouth Hot Take guys/gals are able to keep their jobs. It's sad because we don't know fact vs opinion anymore. It's just like CNN, NBC, ABC, FOX News, etc. At least with FOX Sports (from what I have gathered the past few months), they almost always do strictly sports. I do understand that they are trying to reconfigure their audience, though, too. I guess we will see what happens.
They have put so much marketing and effort into that show that they will not ditch it at this point. Plus that show breaks one of the barriers that has for a long time been one of the complaints against Sportscenter, which is that it is too homogenous. Yes it is utterly unwatchable to me.
Not to be trite, but you don't have to look that far at all. If you look down Page 1 today, you do pretty good with the Sports to "other crap" thread ratio.
On most given days though, this sports board is prone to all manner of soap operas with Husker tidbits making up a small selection of content.
I feel bad for Ed Werder. He provided me with a lot of Cowboys info through the years.
Disagree. They could spend wayy more time on actual sports.
I cant speak for others but i never watch espn anymore. Used to all the time. Theyve changed, i havent. Im not saying my opinion matters to them, im just saying what it is.
I don't watch any of the sports shows anymore except maybe like the Monday Night Countdown and the Sunday Night Pregame.
I tend to agree with you. I think there's still an audience for solid, fluff-free sports programming, but nobody wants to produce it.
I'm not sure how many here are old enough to remember This Week in Baseball with Mel Allen. It was a brilliantly produced program that gave you a great recap of everything that happened in MLB over the past week, in just 30 minutes. Despite all the games and scores available 24/7 today, I really think a program like that could still be very popular with baseball fans. But instead, FOX gives up a pile of dog crap by the same title that offers absolutely nothing substantive about what happened in MLB over the past week. That's just one example, but I do think there are fans out there who still want to know more about what's happening on the field and less of the locker room gossip and other sideshow nonsense.
Just on the surface, ESPN appears to be keeping most of its insiders and former player personnel.
Folks whose main point in life is to get gossip or translate coach speak or other media events into "what this really means in the locker room" to the lay person.
In the last 20 years or so, sports shows have been plus sizing, but they aren't adding statisticians and non-celebrities. They are taking every Ray Lewis they can find and putting 10 of them on a show.
Arguably the best segment ESPN had in 20 years was "Jacked Up" which was entertaining, but also not journalistically rich.
Yes, I suspect the trend that I'm complaining about above is only going to get worse. I have no illusions about substantive sports programming making a comeback. I do not, and will never, care about the inside skinny Adam Schefter picked up while sniffing someone's jockstrap in the Patriots' locker room, or the music Bryce Harper likes to listen to while in the batting cage. But that's either what draws viewers and sells ads, or it's what someone thinks will draw viewers and sell ads.
Maybe they could get rid of these two turds next and that botched-abortion of a show they have.
Jamele Hill and Michael Smith are putrid.
I know there are a bunch of entertainment experts here, but until you look at the data, you won't understand why the networks go for more story lines, even controversial perspectives.
Same thing happened on MTV. At first, MTV was the only place to watch a music video, so we jumped on it and watched and waited for our song. Then two things happened, 1) people could start to see videos online when they wanted to and 2) watching a video you'd already seen is less appealing and you don't tune in as frequently. So they created reality shows which were actually quite successful initially.
In sports, we all get scores, including highlights and statistics on our phones, tablets or computers. ESPN used to be the only way to get those. So now, ESPN is seeking new ways to get people to tune in. Hard to blame them, right?
This is more a story about a changing media type and how people consume media than it is boycotting against political takes on the network.
Watch Mike & Mike any given morning. Their show is maybe 50% sports-related (of which 90% is a story line and not really talking about outcomes of a game) - the other 50% is humorous lifestyle content.
Same thing happened on MTV. At first, MTV was the only place to watch a music video, so we jumped on it and watched and waited for our song. Then two things happened, 1) people could start to see videos online when they wanted to and 2) watching a video you'd already seen is less appealing and you don't tune in as frequently. So they created reality shows which were actually quite successful initially.
In sports, we all get scores, including highlights and statistics on our phones, tablets or computers. ESPN used to be the only way to get those. So now, ESPN is seeking new ways to get people to tune in. Hard to blame them, right?
This is more a story about a changing media type and how people consume media than it is boycotting against political takes on the network.
Watch Mike & Mike any given morning. Their show is maybe 50% sports-related (of which 90% is a story line and not really talking about outcomes of a game) - the other 50% is humorous lifestyle content.
I'm pretty sure I do understand why the networks go for more story lines and controversy, and already acknowledged that. What I don't understand is why, with an ocean of channels and time slots available, someone can't still produce high-quality, sports-oriented programming? I find that Big Ten Network and Pac-12 Network have filled that void a little bit, but even their programming drifts off the rails quite often.
What decisions are you referring to? I can only think of the brilliant Longhorn Network and the amazing idea of talking about politics instead of showing highlights.
The amount of money they pay to MLB NBA and NFL. Plus the conference media rights to SEC, ACC now Big Ten.
You just answered your question. You said you understood why networks do this and then ask why others don't go for the old model that others are avoiding.
That's like saying "why can't more phone companies make landlines these days? There's a void there in that business."
The void is there for a reason. People are abandoning that type of media content these days, so why would someone want to fill that?
But it's not simply a question of what ESPN's going to air on its main network in prime time. I was hoping, for example, that ESPNU would offer some more substantive analysis on college sports - but it rarely does. A very well-produced College Baseball Weekly program certainly wouldn't draw a large audience, but I think it could help build interest in the college baseball games ESPN is airing every week, and the regionals, super regionals and College World Series. That's the kind of programming I'm talking about, something that offers an actual reason for sports fans to go to one of the "sub-ESPNs". Why have multiple channels if they're all going to air the same crap?
And on that some point, why wouldn't you want your between-games programming to give viewers more reasons to, you know, watch the games you're airing? I feel as though sports networks used to do a better job of that, but now they want to fill the time with other content. Meanwhile they can't understand why the ratings for games are falling.
Last edited:
Mike and Mike will be gone soon. Greenberg is getting his own show and Mike Golic will be let go. thats the only show on espn I watched. caught about 20 minutes while making my morning coffee and doing my business.
ESPN has been interviewing new blood since at least last fall so this shouldn't have been a shock to those let go.
The layoffs aren't going to save ESPN. This will start hitting sports contracts sooner than later. Contracts might be lucky to get 70 cents on the dollar in a year or so.. good thing we "paid in" to the B1G the last 7 years.. smh
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
I think BTN, NFL, MLB networks will be just fine as long as they continue to give good programming. When they get political, race-baiting, or shock-jock shows.... then they will feel what ESPN is going through.
I think the Big 10 Conference should feel fortunate that they signed new television rights recently and weren't negatively impacted by ESPN's financial issues.
I always enjoyed listening to Jeremy Crabtree when he was on in KC on 810 am.
I truly feel for the ESPN employees that lost their jobs today and hope they land on their feet soon.
I always enjoyed listening to Jeremy Crabtree when he was on in KC on 810 am.
I truly feel for the ESPN employees that lost their jobs today and hope they land on their feet soon.
Golic talks a lot about his imminent move to Arizona so I think he has his own timeline in mind but I think Mike & Mike works because of both Mikes. Greeny is the perfect journalist/fan but he needs the jock to appeal to a wider less-sophisticated audience.
When Golic leaves it will be because he's ready not because he's forced out. But that show is very popular, so that's one that won't be messed with.
When Golic leaves it will be because he's ready not because he's forced out. But that show is very popular, so that's one that won't be messed with.
These two turd burglars made the cut?Maybe they could get rid of these two turds next and that botched-abortion of a show they have.
I second this. I feel for these guys too, but And in no way, shape or form do I work for FOX Sports or mean to jam FOX Sports down this thread's throat, I just know that they are ESPN's top competitor and it's a huge chance to get gnab quality journalists and really compete with ESPN even more than they have been able to in recent past. Laying off this many decent sports content workers is also a huge risk. ESPN may think they are 10 steps ahead letting them go due to digital sport content demand, but I could see FOX sports gaining some cred from this and might be able to flip some loyal ESPN viewers.
BTN and the PAC-12 Network, were smart to partner with Fox and not just let ESPN have the majority share of viewers.