After the settlement with ESPN (details undisclosed) he's going to be hosting a Baseball Tonight type show for DAZN streaming and also rumored he will show up at MLBN....How does this impact Adnan Virk?
I don't think CP has to worry, they are adding staff for their attempts to enter the market on this side of the pond, so far it's all really minor sports or, as in the case of MLB, purely a streaming operation.I hope he doesn't do tennis and European hockey!
That´s what ESPN doesn´t know and they also don´t know that a team can´t pitch 15 1/3 innings and the other one 2 2/3.Unless there was a trade, Boyd pitches for Detroit.
Yeah, little stuff like that. Seems like a simple fix. If ESPN cared.That´s what ESPN doesn´t know and they also don´t know that a team can´t pitch 15 1/3 innings and the other one 2 2/3.
You mean (as mentioned during last night's telecast) you weren't in awe of Tim's list for Top 5 strongest MLB hands that he has shaken in his life?David Ross has been awesome to listen to the last two nights.
Can’t decide if I love or hate Tim Kurkjian in the booth. The voice is bad, some of the stories/facts are totally pointless, but he clearly loves the game.
The top strongest hands list was after my post. That one give me a strong push to the Hate column.You mean (as mentioned during last night's telecast) you weren't in awe of Tim's list for Top 5 strongest MLB hands that he has shaken in his life?
What a joke.
And then Greenberg this morning tells us that he thinks the Cleveland Browns are the best team in the AFC.
Good Lord.....they pay people to do this stuff?
I like the Yahoo sports appUntil about a week ago, when I chose the Scores tab on the espn app on my Android phone, it gave me my Favorite teams (Sox, Bruins, Celts, Pats), so I could just look there and get all the scores for those teams from yesterday l useful when two teams have late night games to have those grouped together.
Now the Scores tab just shows me the scores they want to show me, not the teams I have Favorited. Sheesh.
Bill Simmons had a podcast with John Skipper recently, and he discussed the beginning of the magazine. IIRC he said they were modelling it after the Rolling Stone and even ended up using the same print shop as them to reduce expenses.No snark here, but I had no idea that ESPN the Magazine was still a thing, I believe that I have the first issue somewhere.
I had a subscription back when it started and I hated it. The layout was confusing, it tried really hard not to be "your daddy's sports magazine" and was just not very good in terms of written content or photographs. Also, IIRC it was about the size of Rolling Stone, which made it awkward to read too.
That makes sense and mission accomplished ESPN. Was it still that size? I know that RS reduced it's magazine size about 10 years ago, I wasn't sure if ESPN TM did the same.Bill Simmons had a podcast with John Skipper recently, and he discussed the beginning of the magazine. IIRC he said they were modelling it after the Rolling Stone and even ended up using the same print shop as them to reduce expenses.
I think it's because he's a professional Sports Gambler, and they're tying a lot of their future to gambling analysis. Though your point still holds.
That’s kinda pushing the limits on what the E encompasses...
Yes, it was massive. As someone that got the magazine for the Insider membership (now ESPN+) that came with it; it had shifted even further into a magazine about athletes off-the-field more than anything, with each issue having a specific theme (Fashion, Fame, NEXT, Gambling, etc.) and was pretty worthless unless you were really into what Odell Beckham Jr. is wearing. They would occasionally still deliver a really nice, well-written long-form piece from time to time, though.That makes sense and mission accomplished ESPN. Was it still that size? I know that RS reduced it's magazine size about 10 years ago, I wasn't sure if ESPN TM did the same.
I completely agree with your last sentence. There were a few years when the Magazine was actually a great read, even when it was getting universally mocked, especially on SoSH. But that was many years ago.Yes, it was massive. As someone that got the magazine for the Insider membership (now ESPN+) that came with it; it had shifted even further into a magazine about athletes off-the-field more than anything, with each issue having a specific theme (Fashion, Fame, NEXT, Gambling, etc.) and was pretty worthless unless you were really into what Odell Beckham Jr. is wearing. They would occasionally still deliver a really nice, well-written long-form piece from time to time, though.
Booger McFarland will move from his field-analyst position to join play-by-play commentator Joe Tessitore in the booth for the 50th season of Monday Night Football, ESPN announced Wednesday.
The two will be joined by sideline reporter Lisa Salters, who returns for her eighth MNF season, and new officiating analyst John Parry.
Agreed. April was just an F. The minus is a bridge too far and a fake grade.I mean, they're off to a bad start but that is click bait.
On their app a lot of soccer tables haven't updated for weeks.Anyone else notice that they're having issues updating the current data? I'm not talking players' stats. The MLB standings haven't reflected the previous night's results in some cases. They used to have updates within seconds after the game ended.
And before I get the barrage... Yes. I do have better things to worry about.
“Without question our data tells us our fans do not want us to cover politics,” Pitaro said. “My job is to provide clarity. I really believe that some of our talent was confused on what was expected of them. If you fast-forward to today, I don’t believe they are confused.”
https://www.sportingnews.com/us/other-sports/news/skip-bayless-fs1-undisputed-trent-dilfer-colin-kaepernick-49ers-shannon-sharpe-espn-sunday-nfl-countdown-plantation-mentality/90am4rhlu6ah19rr74pozbovaAgreed on Hill/Smith - it made sense to have them cover those topics and provide their POV. However, was there anybody at ESPN available or willing (or permitted) to give an opposing viewpoint? I haven't watched enough to know if that happened or not, but I don't recall reading much about that happening.
What would you have had them do - mention the bad play and then *not* show the replay? (Because the Sox have been so friggin' good for the past 15 years, believe it or not it's actually possible that some viewers actually might not remember Game 6 in 1986 very well.)ESPN states in somber tones how unfortunate it is that Buckner is only remembered for his bad play, then lead off their retrospective of his career with the replay. The hypocrisy is bottomless.
I mean, listen, I liked Buck and I thought that he was a really good baseball player. But unfortunately, he's remembered for one pretty shitty play. To not show it wouldn't be correct. People make mistakes and shit happens. To ignore them or pretend that they didn't happen isn't being truthful.ESPN states in somber tones how unfortunate it is that Buckner is only remembered for his bad play, then lead off their retrospective of his career with the replay. The hypocrisy is bottomless.
I was 13 years old when Nixon died, and found it bizarre that there was literally zero mention of the resignation, Watergate, etc.I mean, listen, I liked Buck and I thought that he was a really good baseball player. But unfortunately, he's remembered for one pretty shitty play. To not show it wouldn't be correct. People make mistakes and shit happens. To ignore them or pretend that they didn't happen isn't being truthful.
It's also been over 30 years. Many viewers weren't alive when it happened, and may not have seen it. It's right that they showed it, but I think they could have built up to it.I mean, listen, I liked Buck and I thought that he was a really good baseball player. But unfortunately, he's remembered for one pretty shitty play. To not show it wouldn't be correct. People make mistakes and shit happens. To ignore them or pretend that they didn't happen isn't being truthful.
Completely disagree.It's also been over 30 years. Many viewers weren't alive when it happened, and may not have seen it. It's right that they showed it, but I think they could have built up to it.
I would bet every dollar I have that if he died tmw, the first highlight shown would be something from his run with Sacramento or a shot of him with the Fab Five.The definitive Chris Webber highlight is the timeout right? Case closed.