- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Mad Dog Russo's ESPN/NBA Rant - "The Blank has hit the fan"
Posted on 4/26/17 at 3:01 pm to Jack Ruby
Posted on 4/26/17 at 3:01 pm to Jack Ruby
quote:
Layed out exactly how greedy these leagues are and how stupid espn is for forking over $12 billion simply for the NBA.
"Ed Werder and Jayson Stark's salary are going right into Mark Cuban's pockets"
Well...yeah. That's how business works. I try to get the most money out of you while you try to get the most money out of me. Blame ESPNs incompetence not NBA owners. They did their job. Ed Werder and Jayson Stark's employer did not.
This post was edited on 4/26/17 at 3:02 pm
0
Posted on 4/26/17 at 3:01 pm to DupontsCircle
ESPN is paying 2-4 times more for the NFL than the other networks and they get along less games to air. They overpaid for basically a highlight show (also seen on NFL Network), NFL draft (also seen on NFL Network) and Monday night football (hasn't been good in YEARS)
Posted on 4/26/17 at 3:04 pm to shel311
quote:he's a regional act. if you're going to have limited appeal you can't do better than NY.
That is so unfathomable to me.
I don't get how anyone can take more than about 3 seconds of that show
Posted on 4/26/17 at 3:05 pm to YNWA
Sure but firing a handful of personalities isn't going to all of a sudden balance their books.
Posted on 4/26/17 at 3:07 pm to YNWA
quote:
ESPN is paying 2-4 times more for the NFL than the other networks and they get along less games to air. They overpaid for basically a highlight show (also seen on NFL Network), NFL draft (also seen on NFL Network) and Monday night football (hasn't been good in YEARS)
yeah the thing was ESPN felt second rate in the sports broadcasting world until they got that MNF deal. they overpaid the ever living frick for MNF for legitimacy. then coincidentally (although this is hindsight bias and didn't appear that way at the time) they had a dramatic rise at the same time. they thought they were untouchable and kept paying way too much for broadcasting rights (including orchestrating CFB conference realignment solely to pay the conferences more money) and never faced the reality of cord-cutting. the data was pretty clear well before they overpaid the NBA for that new deal, but they were just arrogant
Posted on 4/26/17 at 3:10 pm to Jack Ruby
This is a stupid rant.
This is true but most already realize it. The only time I'll watch ESPN over MLB Network for baseball coverage is Sunday night baseball (on mute because the announcers are terrible).
NHL... lol like ESPN has any idea what's going on in hockey. I bet you half the people that work there couldn't name an NHL player outside of Crosby or Ovechkin.
quote:
If you want hockey or baseball coverage from ESPN from now on... Good luck.
This is true but most already realize it. The only time I'll watch ESPN over MLB Network for baseball coverage is Sunday night baseball (on mute because the announcers are terrible).
NHL... lol like ESPN has any idea what's going on in hockey. I bet you half the people that work there couldn't name an NHL player outside of Crosby or Ovechkin.
Posted on 4/26/17 at 3:19 pm to SlowFlowPro
espn? abc? they're all the same company. if you're going to pay out of the arse for something why would you not put it on network. I know abc's ratings had been slipping but the nfl was on such a tremendous upswing.
they promoted their coverage team gimmicks over the games. the guys in the booth aren't the draw.
they promoted their coverage team gimmicks over the games. the guys in the booth aren't the draw.
Posted on 4/26/17 at 3:24 pm to DelU249
quote:
espn? abc? they're all the same company
they're under the same Disney umbrella but they are not the same company
Posted on 4/26/17 at 3:33 pm to SlowFlowPro
I know but that's an irrelevant distinction. abc sports is now "espn on abc"
you'd think the brass at Disney would think "hmmm. the ratings are slipping, now it's on cable but we paid MORE for it" and i'm pretty sure they were smart enough to know the nfl was just getting bigger and bigger. it doesn't make sense.
if you want it to make espn more relevant then use their crew, etc. and broadcast it on network which is what they do now with the NBA. espn bid on the rights but a lot of big games are broadcast on abc.
you'd think the brass at Disney would think "hmmm. the ratings are slipping, now it's on cable but we paid MORE for it" and i'm pretty sure they were smart enough to know the nfl was just getting bigger and bigger. it doesn't make sense.
if you want it to make espn more relevant then use their crew, etc. and broadcast it on network which is what they do now with the NBA. espn bid on the rights but a lot of big games are broadcast on abc.
This post was edited on 4/26/17 at 3:38 pm
Posted on 4/26/17 at 3:34 pm to Jack Ruby
Ed Werder and Jayson Stark must have been making a shitload of cash if Mad Dog thinks ESPN had to choose between the NBA and them.
Posted on 4/26/17 at 3:43 pm to Walking the Earth
quote:them and 98 other people plus diminished roles.
Ed Werder and Jayson Stark must have been making a shitload of cash if Mad Dog thinks ESPN had to choose between the NBA and them.
but they probably were. it's been said that espn overvalues talent and it's my opinion that they have a bad eye for it. they put regional writers on national tv. you don't need to be a genius to know that's a bad fricking idea. they go to newsrooms instead of affiliate tv stations.
Posted on 4/26/17 at 3:44 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
that NBA deal literally broke the back of ESPN and is going to totally frick up the NBA long term
This is categorically UNTRUE.
Posted on 4/26/17 at 3:46 pm to DelU249
quote:
they put regional writers on national tv. you don't need to be a genius to know that's a bad fricking idea. they go to newsrooms instead of affiliate tv stations.
That's probably cheaper.
Posted on 4/26/17 at 3:48 pm to YNWA
quote:
ESPN is paying 2-4 times more for the NFL than the other networks and they get along less games to air. They overpaid for basically a highlight show (also seen on NFL Network), NFL draft (also seen on NFL Network) and Monday night football (hasn't been good in YEARS)
However, I think we all know why people like to blame the NBA for this ESPN debacle and not the NFL. Mike Russo hates the NBA.
Posted on 4/26/17 at 3:52 pm to Allthatfades
quote:
Dog is a legend in NYC. He has his own channel. He isn't Stern but he's probably one of the bigger names at Sirius
After Howard he's probably tbe biggest brand there. If he and Mike ever did get back together it would carry the whole network.
There are rumors though that Chris wants Mike to join him every Monday during football season on XM.
Posted on 4/26/17 at 3:55 pm to saintsfan22
probably. you can still write for the boston herald and do espn television and being on tv boosts your readers thus you come cheap, but at an abstract level if you're the director of programming for a tv network and you fill your on air schedule with people who've never been on tv well it's going to be a big fricking boring disaster.
they had a hit with smith/bayliss cold pizza gimmick, but otherwise it's really boring.
look at their talent in the 90s when espn started getting a lot bigger. it was tv/radio broadcasters with personalities not some fat frick who works for the Chicago tribune.
they had a hit with smith/bayliss cold pizza gimmick, but otherwise it's really boring.
look at their talent in the 90s when espn started getting a lot bigger. it was tv/radio broadcasters with personalities not some fat frick who works for the Chicago tribune.
Posted on 4/26/17 at 4:01 pm to DelU249
quote:
if you're the director of programming for a tv network and you fill your on air schedule with people who've never been on tv well it's going to be a big fricking boring disaster.
If you're doing a scripted drama. If it's a debate show about yesterday's sports happenings it's a great idea. This is a pre-ESPN idea as well, it's taken from places like the McLaughlin Group.
quote:
it was tv/radio broadcasters with personalities not some fat frick who works for the Chicago tribune.
PTI is an example of them getting two newspaper guys with no TV experience and it working fantastically.
This post was edited on 4/26/17 at 4:02 pm
Posted on 4/26/17 at 4:03 pm to DelU249
quote:
if you're going to pay out of the arse for something why would you not put it on network.
The way I understand it is, the contract with cable/sat is they have to show so many games on ESPN to justify the cost of it per subscriber. Keeping them from dumping all the games to ABC to get more viewers for ad money.
Posted on 4/26/17 at 4:11 pm to saintsfan22
quote:no, it's not. unattractive people who aren't natural on camera and aren't interesting aren't ideal for television.
If it's a debate show about yesterday's sports happenings it's a great idea
quote:wilbon, SAS and bayliss...they've found interesting people with a knack for television and had some successes. but for every one of those there's 10 jay mariottis, that ugly lesbian broad from the herald, or that creepy dude from the morning news.
PTI is an example of them getting two newspaper guys with no TV experience and it working fantastically.
you're doing television, and you can see the difference between tv people doing tv and regional sports writers doing tv. you can justify the cost, but if you're telling me that's good tv
maybe their tv guys just aren't given any leeway to say anything interesting. you barely notice those guys, and it's also hard to be interesting, funny, entertaining when espn will suspend you or fire you for saying anything politically incorrect. there's no argument to be made. it's awful tv, but worst of all it's boring.
Posted on 4/26/17 at 4:13 pm to Jack Ruby
quote:
Layed out exactly how greedy these leagues are and how stupid espn is for forking over $12 billion simply for the NBA.
The problem is who was ESPN's competition for the NBA contract? They outbid themselves for that contacts, and can only blame themselves for not having flexibility
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News