- 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: ESPN is at a crossroads
Posted on 9/15/17 at 11:20 am to JasonMason
Posted on 9/15/17 at 11:20 am to JasonMason
quote:quote:
quote:
Once the MLB deal runs out, the only thing that ESPN has that will keep large swaths of white conservative viewers is college football and the NFL (which are both seasonal)
Lol. I'm not disagreeing with you here, but aren't all sports by nature seasonal?
Think he means that without MLB, ESPN won't have anything to attract large numbers of conservative viewers from February until August during the football offseason.
0
Posted on 9/15/17 at 11:20 am to Tiger Prawn
quote:Normally, even that shouldn't be a reason to fire her. Either she attracts viewers or doesn't. That's really the sum total.
I agree with you to an extent. I don't care that she doesn't like Trump and wouldn't care if she said he was the worst president ever or that she disagreed with his political agenda, but she went too far IMO by calling him a white supremacist.
but
quote:
But ESPN already set precedent with firing on-air personalities in the past for making political statements on social media...see Curt Schilling
Yep.
Which means the sum total reality is, ESPN has announced to the world......."frick White Conservatives".
I mean, OK. That's a choice. But like us or not, we're still a rather significant block in the market.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 11:21 am to Lakeboy7
quote:not true. they went all in on the daytime tv demo, largely African American, lots of young men in college or working nights or not working...and women are also the bulk of daytime tv audience so we need to appeal to them too.
they went "all in" on the demo least likely to cut
it just didn't work out like they wanted it to.
daytime tv on network...lot of money there, ratings, stars and black personalities make up a big part of the programming. espn is just a poorly managed company and now they've been hijacked because the only audience they have left would drop them lickity split if they dared not to be #woke
they've pretty much resigned themselves to the fact that their old audience (which was substantially larger) is never coming back; that's the only way to explain why they stubbornly not only refuse to change but keep going further left, more social commentary, less sports
they can't even afford professional broadcasters yet they pay hill tons of money as a centerpiece personality to anchor a show that nobody watches.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 11:21 am to JasonMason
quote:
That's literally what I said. Maybe you didn't mean to attribute that to me earlier, but this is what I said. The drop in ratings for the OC shows is obviously causing a loss in ad revenue, but it does not have nearly the affect that losing the ad revenue on live sports does. Especially with the growing contracts.
The SJW (not liberal) stuff is playing a part in the demise, but it's small in comparison for ESPNs inability to adapt to a changing landscape and overpaying for league rights. I agree that people are overstating the SJW bent on ESPNs demise, but IMO it's going to get to the point that people just associate ESPN with their personalities like Hill that they don't like and they'll stop watching the random football game or baseball game just because it's sports because they'll actively avoid ESPN.
Sorry, yeah I think we're on the same page. Lot's of comments coming fast, lost track of who was saying what.
I agree with everything you said except that last part about random games. That still includes paying for the channel to watch the big games so I don't think that'll make a difference either.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 11:22 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:Let's be honest here.
Can you prove it's not?
Liberals can't even accept that their batshit crazy wing is a large part of why they lost around 1000 seats the last 8 years along with the Presidency.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 11:22 am to biggsc
quote:
Are they going to continue on this progressivism
Yes.
Look who runs Disney.
The progressive tilt of every entertainment company is not an accident.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 11:23 am to ShortyRob
quote:
I mean, that's what it looks like.
I believe ESPN in trying to broaden their viewership in order to capture those that are not hard core sports fans, and who are more interested in the "soap opera" side of sports, messed up and the more hard core sports fans are rebelling and the soft audience they were after isn't there.
I might be wrong, but it gets old hearing about Kapernick, athletes that beat up their girl friends, and drug violations 24/7.
I watch a lot of college football, and many like me want to hear the inside stuff, strategy, recruiting, and things about the games themselves. Heart warming stories are fine, but they don't come ahead of the red meat stuff.
But it seems like we get all these heart warming stories, stories about players off the field, stories about off the field issues, and the X and O side is being lost.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 11:24 am to mwade91383
quote:
I'd buy HBO, Comedy Central, the sports channels, that's it (okay plus a few stupid channels for my wife and kids). Would save tons of money! Why do I have to pay for the Hallmark channel?!??!
Because in many cases these channels are owned by the same company and will not allow popular channels to stand alone without bundling less popular channels.
You'd have to force private business to stop this practice (of all or none).
Posted on 9/15/17 at 11:24 am to DelU249
quote:
they can't even afford professional broadcasters yet they pay hill tons of money as a centerpiece personality to anchor a show that nobody watches.
And ya know, I never watch that shite so, I actually had no real idea who she was until this stuff.
So, I looked her up and just LOLed at her BIO.
You want to know something else hiring her on SC does? It's like this huge clarion call that says "black pussy is a qualification!!!".
There is NOTHING in her background that says "yeah, pick her over people who have actually achieved something in sports broadcasting".
Posted on 9/15/17 at 11:25 am to biggsc
The progressive slant is a small part of why ESPN is in trouble, but they just double and triple down on it.
That Rob Parker guy (who called RG3 a cornball brother) yesterday said that Tom Brady needed to speak out in support of Colin Kaepernick
frick no he doesn't. Tom Brady is too busy being pissed off about losing last week and winning another championship. That's why he's the best.
That Rob Parker guy (who called RG3 a cornball brother) yesterday said that Tom Brady needed to speak out in support of Colin Kaepernick
frick no he doesn't. Tom Brady is too busy being pissed off about losing last week and winning another championship. That's why he's the best.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 11:25 am to doubleb
quote:
I believe ESPN in trying to broaden their viewership in order to capture those that are not hard core sports fans, and who are more interested in the "soap opera" side of sports, messed up and the more hard core sports fans are rebelling and the soft audience they were after isn't there.
It's like ESPN intends to be the 2030 version of MTV. IE......the most incorrectly call lettered station on the air.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 11:25 am to texashorn
quote:
Because in many cases these channels are owned by the same company and will not allow popular channels to stand alone without bundling less popular channels.
You'd have to force private business to stop this practice (of all or none).
100% agree. Which is why I said earlier it'll never happen, I was just kind of griping about paying for things I don't want.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 11:26 am to ShortyRob
quote:
Liberals can't even accept that their batshit crazy wing is a large part of why they lost around 1000 seats the last 8 years along with the Presidency.
Many are still in denial. The country isn't ready for their brand of "social justice."
Posted on 9/15/17 at 11:26 am to ShortyRob
quote:when I got out of the navy and was in college I would occasionally watch their stuff...hardcore during the saints run in 09.
I actually had no real idea who she was until this stuff.
I remember her and she was #woke and bat shite even then, but its even worse now. i'm familiar with her because the interwebs informs me, and the interwebs fricking hates her.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 11:26 am to mwade91383
quote:
Show me some data that says people have canceled their entire cable package because ESPN is too liberal.
You don't understand how this works. If you have a cable package, the cable company knows what channels you view and when. They are not going to continue to pay ESPN the same for access, if fewer people are tuning to that channel. Arbitron and the other polling companies also have boxes in homes. The industry, to include streaming, pretty much knows who watches what and when. Advertisement $$$ follow this data. ESPN is on a road to disaster and they've given the steering wheel to the farthest left people they can find.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 11:27 am to Salmon
quote:
I don't really see anyone close to taking them over right now I'm curious to see how well their solo streaming app will do when it is released
Their streaming sucks even with my super fast Cox internet. As such, I seriously doubt they will be increasing viewership through their streaming service.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 11:27 am to magildachunks
quote:
Who is it now?
I foresee downvotes but no valid counter-arguments.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 11:29 am to Salmon
quote:
I don't really see anyone close to taking them over right now
From something Les Moonvies said this week, I think CBS is going to take a major piece of the viewership.
An unrelated example: we had a great lock shop in Knoxville, good for all sorts of odd hardware for doors, windows, etc. They went out of business because Home Depot and Lowes took the key and lock part of their business by undercutting prices.
I think CBS is going to take the good part of sports, the sports viewers that advertisers want, and leave the dregs to ESPN. CBS doesn't go after the money pit called the Olympics, they've seen the empty advertising space for all but a small amount of the broadcasts.
The Golf Chanel has taken viewership. CBS and Fox are taking football.
How long until ESPN has trouble with the payouts they have guaranteed the NCAAF football conferences, the Longhorn network, etc.?
Definitely will impact college athletic budgets and maybe even HC salaries.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 11:30 am to RTRinTampa
quote:
Show me some data that says people have canceled their entire cable package because ESPN is too liberal.
me
ask SFP, he'll tell you i'm not the cord cutting type.
I don't mind that I pay for channels I don't watch. I very much mind paying for channels that rely on subscription $, that promotes racist prog BLM shite.
not having cable is an inconvenience a couple of times during the week, but i'm committed.
Posted on 9/15/17 at 11:30 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
the demo they're targeting is black males and they keep trying (and failing) to get women interested in watching their shows
Yep, pure rocket science to come up with the numbers that show roughly 7% percent of the population is more profitable than 30%.
Page 6 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News