The ESPN Bloodbath

[DrQue]

Just show more sports highlights, plain and simple. Show me how the game progressed, what plays changed momentum, and keep the drama to the what occurred on field.

Not to mention, the coverage is completely biased toward large market teams. That is understandable to a large extent, but don't expect me to watch NFL Tonight if its all about the Cowboys.

[Adam White]

The problem with ESPN is the same problem with the news. Less actual news or sports and too many colorful, larger-than-life personalities bloviating and offering their "analysis".

[FlaBoy]

People trying to shoe horn politics into this are dipshits who got butthurt because somebody said it was ok for Kaep to kneel or because they (rightfully) fired Curt Schilling for being a disgusting piece of trash.  To say ESPN, a corporate behemoth, is "liberal" or engages in liberal politicking is willfully stupid.  Every single moron on their NFL team has lambasted Kaep, as just one example, and their other talents consistently take a center-right perspective.  I mean, they funded the damn Undefeated, run by MF'ing Jason Whitlock, who is many things, none of them liberal or leftist.

http://www.deeprootanalytics.com/2017/04/27/as-espn-got-more-political-in-2016-it-lost-republican-viewers/

From a TV marketing company...

[Adam White]

People trying to shoe horn politics into this are dipshits who got butthurt because somebody said it was ok for Kaep to kneel or because they (rightfully) fired Curt Schilling for being a disgusting piece of trash.  To say ESPN, a corporate behemoth, is "liberal" or engages in liberal politicking is willfully stupid.  Every single moron on their NFL team has lambasted Kaep, as just one example, and their other talents consistently take a center-right perspective.  I mean, they funded the damn Undefeated, run by MF'ing Jason Whitlock, who is many things, none of them liberal or leftist.

http://www.deeprootanalytics.com/2017/04/27/as-espn-got-more-political-in-2016-it-lost-republican-viewers/

From a TV marketing company...

To the people of Deep Root Analytics, I'd just say that correlation doesn't necessarily equate to causation. Their analysis is based on a belief that ESPN became more "left wing" over a period of time. And then it shows that viewership in "key" states became "less republican" during that period.

There are a number of issues with this. First, they haven't objectively proved that ESPN did, in fact, become more "left wing". Secondly, even if it DID become more "left wing," that doesn't necessarily explain the purported changes in viewership. There could be other reasons - maybe the programming just happened to resonate more with people who have college educations. Maybe they started covering fewer things that mouth breathers enjoy. Maybe it's hard to figure out exactly who is Republican or Democratic (or liberal or conservative) in a world where polls can't seem to get anything right and a guy like Donald Trump can carry the traditional Democratic heartland of the rust belt.

This is pretty poor. I'm not saying that ESPN hasn't become more politicized - I don't know. But I'd expect to see some sort of Freakonomics-style analysis before I accept it - especially if I am going to believe that has anything to do with ESPN's current financial woes.

[BridgeTroll]

Have another drink Rachel and tell us how you really feel...

[acme54321]

I don't really pay any attention to ESPN unless a Gator game is on but everyone I know that's big into sports cites #3 and #4 as the reason ESPN now sucks.  People want to hear about sports, not watch a bunch of guys argue about random crap that they somehow loosely relate to sports.

[FlaBoy]

People trying to shoe horn politics into this are dipshits who got butthurt because somebody said it was ok for Kaep to kneel or because they (rightfully) fired Curt Schilling for being a disgusting piece of trash.  To say ESPN, a corporate behemoth, is "liberal" or engages in liberal politicking is willfully stupid.  Every single moron on their NFL team has lambasted Kaep, as just one example, and their other talents consistently take a center-right perspective.  I mean, they funded the damn Undefeated, run by MF'ing Jason Whitlock, who is many things, none of them liberal or leftist.

http://www.deeprootanalytics.com/2017/04/27/as-espn-got-more-political-in-2016-it-lost-republican-viewers/

From a TV marketing company...

To the people of Deep Root Analytics, I'd just say that correlation doesn't necessarily equate to causation. Their analysis is based on a belief that ESPN became more "left wing" over a period of time. And then it shows that viewership in "key" states became "less republican" during that period.

There are a number of issues with this. First, they haven't objectively proved that ESPN did, in fact, become more "left wing". Secondly, even if it DID become more "left wing," that doesn't necessarily explain the purported changes in viewership. There could be other reasons - maybe the programming just happened to resonate more with people who have college educations. Maybe they started covering fewer things that mouth breathers enjoy. Maybe it's hard to figure out exactly who is Republican or Democratic (or liberal or conservative) in a world where polls can't seem to get anything right and a guy like Donald Trump can carry the traditional Democratic heartland of the rust belt.

This is pretty poor. I'm not saying that ESPN hasn't become more politicized - I don't know. But I'd expect to see some sort of Freakonomics-style analysis before I accept it - especially if I am going to believe that has anything to do with ESPN's current financial woes.

1. As to the original article, anyone going to the Federalist Society for coherent analysis, let alone on sports, is...um...searching in the wrong place.  DAMNIT THERE WERE NO SPORTS WHEN WASHINGTON PUT PEN TO THE CONSTITUTION AND SO I SAY THEY SHOULD BE BANNNNNNNED!!!!!

2. Any purported news site citing freakin' Clay Travis and Outkick the Coverage as a source of expertise is suspect as hell.  Travis' whole fanbase is premised on white outrage and victimization.  He's clown shoes.

I don't know why I laughed out loud at this...but I did...lol

[peestandingup]

Have another drink Rachel and tell us how you really feel...

These guys say it better than I can: http://deadspin.com/no-espn-isn-t-losing-money-because-it-s-liberal-you-clu-1794713741

>Quoting a political bias sports blog owned by Univision that claims there's no political bias in sports

[Tacachale]

^Everyone has their own biases. I'm sorry to to be the first one to tell you this, but that goes for you too.

[JBTripper]

Just show more sports highlights, plain and simple. Show me how the game progressed, what plays changed momentum, and keep the drama to the what occurred on field.

Not to mention, the coverage is completely biased toward large market teams. That is understandable to a large extent, but don't expect me to watch NFL Tonight if its all about the Cowboys.

This ship has sailed. They might as well describe the sports highlights in writing, print them on broadsheets, and deliver them to your house the next day. That is to say, a sports highlight show in 2017 is as outdated as a newspaper.

If I'm watching a Gator game on TV and a highlight happens, the Gators' Twitter account posts the clip before the commercial break. Fans can watch the exact highlight they want to see on demand literally seconds after the highlight occurs. Who's going to tune in to see a few hand-selected highlights that are inevitably going to be 98% large-market teams that you don't care about anyway?

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

Who's going to tune in to see a few hand-selected highlights that are inevitably going to be 98% large-market teams that you don't care about anyway?

A lot of people used to tune in for these guys.

https://www.youtube.com/v/U7c0vzeXxGw

[Tacachale]

Just show more sports highlights, plain and simple. Show me how the game progressed, what plays changed momentum, and keep the drama to the what occurred on field.

Not to mention, the coverage is completely biased toward large market teams. That is understandable to a large extent, but don't expect me to watch NFL Tonight if its all about the Cowboys.

This ship has sailed. They might as well describe the sports highlights in writing, print them on broadsheets, and deliver them to your house the next day. That is to say, a sports highlight show in 2017 is as outdated as a newspaper.

If I'm watching a Gator game on TV and a highlight happens, the Gators' Twitter account posts the clip before the commercial break. Fans can watch the exact highlight they want to see on demand literally seconds after the highlight occurs. Who's going to tune in to see a few hand-selected highlights that are inevitably going to be 98% large-market teams that you don't care about anyway?

I feel that way, too - I only care about the Jags and to an extend teams we are playing, I don't want to sit through an hour of clips and analysis of teams I couldn't care less about. On the other hand, I don't need to see *every* clip from a game I've just watched. Maybe in the future someone will perfect curating the best clips to each team in one place. I'd watch that a lot more than I'd watch Sports Center.

[RattlerGator]

If you're denying that ESPN has *seriously* and blatantly invoked leftwing politics into its broadcast, you need to wake the hell up and you're probably seriously surprised Donald Trump is President of these United States.

Because what they've done isn't open for debate.

When you have a young-ish black male and young-ish black female who are bigtime Barack Obama fans as the anchors for your flagship evening sports show -- well damn, what is there left to say? Anchors, by the way, who don't even know how to fake the funk while theoretically attempting the process of going down the middle of a sports-related political issue (mind you, I like what both of them do but I'm smart enough to know, and sensible enough to know, that shiznit just ain't gonna fly nationally).

When you force a fawning and one-sided discussion of Bruce Jenner, who many people believe is mentally disturbed with sex identity confusion -- well damn, what is there left to say?

When you have to be shamed, shamed!, to take down an essay from a cop-killing fugitive from your espnW website -- -- well damn, what is there left to say?

They made a series of idiotic decisions and have gift-wrapped a ready-made audience for competitors. That's not smart. Not smart at all.

[funwithteeth]

Hm, yes, they promoted some black people and have suggested transgender people are human beings who deserve respect. Pretty damning stuff, RattlerGator.

Real nice of you to throw in "fake the funk" and "shiznit" when discussing said black people, too. Establishes street cred.

[Steve]

The Caitlin Jenner courage award thing in particular sat VERY poorly with me. No issue whatsoever if Bruce is now Caitlin-America is a free country, and she has every right to live her life in her manner.

My frustration in this is twofold:

1. Bruce Jenner won the decathalon in 1976. He (now she) has been completely irrelevant in the sports world since shortly after this. Nearly 40 years later, how is she relevant to sports?
2. There were two MUCH better candidates: Lauren Hill and Noah Galloway. Both were relevant in the sports world in 2015.

The homosexuality coverage I have no issue with-it's a locker room dynamic discussion, and I'm fine with it.

The Black Lives Matter coverage I think is MUCH less relevant. Not really sure what they hoped to accomplish there.

In short, ESPN has gotten too far away from on field coverage. Watch a tape of ESPN's prime time lineup from 1996, and compare it to today. Much more subjective analysis. When you enter a world where people have personal feelings, it's a no-win situation.