View Full Version : Is ESPN good or bad for sports?

Rogue II
01-24-2006, 12:45 PM
This is something I've been thinking about lately. ESPN is the only national sports network, more or less. Fox does have a couple national shows, but for the most part, is regional. OLN picked up hockey, but the rest of their line-up is hunting, fishing, and rodeos. Then, of course, TBS, TNT, WGN, etc. broadcast some sports events, but it isn't their main thing.

ESPN turns all sports into a highlight show. They have also decided hockey isn't worth their time, but poker, figure skating, and outdoor games are. Now, they are trying to do a reality show by following around Barry Bonds, which brings up the whole steroid issue. I think the media is partially to blame that the steroid issue went on so long. The media who cover baseball on a daily basis didn't notice the players getting bigger? One of the beneficiaries of the steroid era, Barry Bonds, will get a show from "The worldwide leader in sports" as he cheats his way to the home run record. Nice.

01-24-2006, 01:15 PM
I know last year they had Pedro Gomez (sp??) follow Bariod around everyday. As far as a show about Bonds? That would suprise me coming from ESPN.

You are right though Rogue that the writers know what is going on but they never say anything while its going on. Sure they will write stories how such and such a player was a real ash but that usually happens after the fact. They don't want to alienate those that allow them to make their living. This can be said of writers not just of the MLB but any league.

01-24-2006, 03:55 PM
ESPN considers Poker a sport and doesn't think hockey is worth it.

ESPN blows and has for a few years.

01-24-2006, 04:15 PM
Don't forget ESPN2 and there Scrabble tourneys.

01-24-2006, 05:51 PM
All I know is that my cable tv bill is really high because of the sports channels that are included with the package deal. I would just as soon not have any sports programming. I get enough of it on network tv (I do watch football, baseball) I don't need anymore on my cable. That's what makes it so high I was told by the cable co. While we're at it, ixnay religion and shopping channels. Sorry about that, I had to vent.:mad:

Lowly Bantha Cleaner
01-24-2006, 05:53 PM
ESPN is a network that is very full of its image and as Rogue II stated, an image that is getting more inflated everyday. They have a lot of personalities on the show that are exuberant (Chris Berman) but many of the Sports Center Anchors/Commentators who are too idiotic or to full of themselves (Sean Salisbury).

They have too many sports personality talkshows like Kornheiser & Wilbon (who are not that bad), Jim Rome (who is bad) and Stephen Smith (who is really bad). Turn down the sports rhetoric, and cover sports in equal time. Does anyone watch TSN in Canada? They actually devote much of their time to world sporting events, or amateur sports, besides Tennis, or Golf. You'll find nary the coverage of those on ESPN. And yes, now that the NHL is gone from the airwaves, I have no reason to tune in now, except to watch ESPN Classic, or maybe the odd billiards match.

01-24-2006, 08:52 PM
The main ESPN channel I watch for highlights and other stuff is ESPN News. To me that is the best choice if you are simply looking for scores and highlights. None of the crazy talk by folks like Stuart Scott (tarheel grad too but I swear he gets on my nerves) and Sean Salisbury. I do watch ESPN2 in the mornings sometimes to catch Mike and Mike. If I had to choose I would definately keep ESPN News and ditch the rest. Give me that and NFL Network (which I absolutely love) and I am all set. I could care less about the other channels.

01-24-2006, 10:15 PM
The only time I really watch ESPN/2 is for football and select basketball games. Those are my two sports of choice so the only time I tune in is if there is a good game on. Other than that I get my scores and highlights and stuff from the web and occasionally ESPN News.

Like Jango said, the NFL Network is pretty sweet. My cable company here just added it this past season so it was all new to me and I fell in love with it right away. Good stuff.

01-25-2006, 01:00 AM
This is a touch and go question. ESPN is great to catch up on sports from tyhe prior night of stuff. They tend to run things into the ground. They praise Kobe for his ridiculous 81 points, but dont get on the Toronto D.

They like to over analyze every little thing. I was thinking today two weeks of superbowl coverage is overkill. How much can they break it down. I do like to listen to ESPN Radio, but only the first thirty minutes of each show. Get each persons takes and then switch to Jim Rome show, who tells it like it is.

Poker, X-games, Outdoor games and other stuff is boring after 5 minutes. Recently I have found myself watching ESPNnews for 30 minutes of highlights and thats it. Screw sportscenter.

kool-aid killer
01-25-2006, 10:52 AM
When i was a teen i liked watching ESPN but now that ive gotten older ive realized that ESPN sucks. The channel hypes way too many teams/players to exhaustion. Theyve got their favorites (USC being a prime example) and endlessly promote them. They show stupid things like poker and the worlds strongest man competitions but they dont give soccer (my favorite sport) much airtime at all. Im sure many of you guys arent fans of the sport either but the day is coming when it will be bigger than all other sports except football here in the States. But instead they show a couple of matches here and there and highlights are rare to come by. Then the anchors all think they are comedians. I cant stand all the talking heads they have on their various programs. And the final straw, they are hypocrites. During the Nebraska vs. Michigan Alamo Bowl of this year Mike Tirico made a comment about how it was a shame that some teams wouldnt be able to meet because of influences outside of college football. Apparently Tirico wasnt aware that ESPN had pushed for Nebraska and Michigan instead of Nebraska and Iowa because they figures the two prominent names would be a bigger ratings grabber. ESPN sucks.

01-25-2006, 10:53 AM
Besides Stewart Scott, I stopped watching ESPN because of crap like this:
"Tonight on Sportscenter: A wild night in NHL playoffs, a big trade in the NFL, and an MLB spring training report."
*cue music*
"Tonights top story: What Kobe ate for breakfast," which would go on for 10 minutes. And that wild night of hockey? One whole minute at the tail end of the show.

01-25-2006, 11:48 AM
I do like to listen to ESPN Radio, but only the first thirty minutes of each show. Get each persons takes and then switch to Jim Rome show, who tells it like it is.

Ohh my poor confused KH, ROME?!?! Every now and then he will have a good point/comment but then he goes and repeats it 2 or 3 times.

01-25-2006, 12:04 PM
Jim Rome is my heroin. I'm a firm believer that the people who don't like him are the people who assume they know what he's like. Everyone thinks he's a ginormous @55, but few see the underlying humor in it.

I watch SportsCenter every morning mostly because that's the only thing on at 5 a.m. besides "Girls Gone Wild" infomercials and those get stale after a dozen viewings. And I can't play "Tiger Woods PGA Tour 2006" very well when I'm all tired and stuff.

SportsCenter is biased in what they present. Kinda like what Rocketboy said, it's basketball, basketball, basketball, basketball, baseball news, basketball, hockey, Grizzlies vs. Bobcats "highlights", Top 10 (90% of which are dunks that happened the day before, too), hockey. And all the while I'm waiting for Stewart Scott's googly eye to fall out.

Maybe if I had any interest in basketball outside of watching the occasional Pistons game I wouldn't mind as much. ESPN2 has "Hockey Thursday" with Barry Melrose, but that doesn't cut it since all they tend to do is talk about Sidney Crosby and the Ottawa Senators.

I am out! ;)

Captain Spoon
01-25-2006, 12:23 PM
espn 8 "The Ocho"= GOOD

01-25-2006, 01:21 PM
espn 8 "The Ocho"= GOODGood call, Cotton!

01-26-2006, 12:18 AM
Jim Rome is my heroin. I'm a firm believer that the people who don't like him are the people who assume they know what he's like. Everyone thinks he's a ginormous @55, but few see the underlying humor in it.

Yup those jokes about OJ just keep getting funnier and funnier. :yes:

figrin bran
02-03-2006, 01:09 AM
on page 39 of the latest issue of espn magazine, there's a picture of some cantina denizens - greedo, feltipern and zutton/snaggletooth among them

before i started working full time hours, i listened to Rome daily. one of my favorite bits of smack from him is how he calls a certain retired spurs center "the mermaid".

02-11-2006, 10:56 PM
The UFC is one of the fastest growing sports today, but ESPN seems to just treat it like a low budget version of the WWE. Shows what little they really know.

Oh well, maybe they'll wake up someday, but until then I'll watch something else.

09-01-2007, 12:56 AM
I love Jim Rome, get bored by UFC and NASCAR, and poker is a guilty pleasure of mine.

09-01-2007, 04:00 AM
I love Jim Rome, get bored by UFC and NASCAR, and poker is a guilty pleasure of mine.

Well, the UFC's going through some growing pains right now. They're trying to expand and put more shows out there to give people more to see and bring in more new fans, but that's forcing them to "spread out" their big name fights over several events. Thus, they've had a few lackluster fight cards in the last few months and that's hurting them a bit. Although last weekend was one of the best fight cards they've had in a while.

Generally, though, I get kind of bored with it myself. Knowing so many of the fighters personally just takes away a lot of the mystique. Now, I just keep up with a few of the fighters that I really like (Hughes, Lawler, Sherk); but honestly when Matt Hughes retires I probably won't go out of my way to watch the PPVs anymore. I'll still keep up with a few fighters via the internet and Spike TV; but no more shelling out $40 a month for the PPVs.

Of course, the UFC is now reaching a level of popularity that has forced ESPN to take notice and start covering the sport. I think making the cover of the May 28th issue of Sports Illustrated was the official introduction of the UFC into mainstream sports.

09-01-2007, 09:06 AM
I'm talking about the last 13 years or so...thought it was boring from the time I was first introduced to it. Frankly I'm surprised that it's getting mainstream recognition at this point in time.

Bel-Cam Jos
09-01-2007, 10:05 AM
Yup those jokes about OJ just keep getting funnier and funnier. :yes:There's that "think you know" detail again. His OJ stuff has been pretty much replaced by the Clones, ARod, Eddie Griffin (or is it Griffith?), or Mike Vick.

Back to the '06 question of this thread, ESPN is bad for those athletes coming up. They've known no other world than that where ESPN controls highlights, game calls, terminology, etc. So, that's what they expect. The Sports Reporters is on at a time when young viewers would never watch (anybody here know it?), and Outside the Lines probably leads to a channel change at its opening music. Remember, ESPN stands for Entertainment Sports [something] Network, not JSPN: Journalistic Sports [something] Network.

09-01-2007, 10:22 AM

I've seen Sports Reporters and I don't think that much of it - it's the other extreme end of the spectrum with some blowhards jockeying for the spotlight.