ESPN Is Pathetic

Rusty13

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 3, 2007
5,378
Sadly, I have a feeling employees of Fantasy Baseball coverage, which has already been slowly cut back, are about to get "future endeavors" wishes. I hope Karabell has already put his resume out there.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,480
deep inside Guido territory
ESPN will lay off around 100 of its on-air and online anchors, reporters and analysts today, sources tell THE DAILY. So far, no specific names have been confirmed; they are expected to start becoming public this morning. ESPN is not announcing officially who is getting let go. Most of the people who are being laid off are not based in Bristol, which means much of the talent will learn their fate via a phone call. Execs making those calls this morning include Senior VP/Event & Studio Production Stephanie Druley, Senior VP/”SportsCenter” & News Rob King and Senior Coordinating Producer Seth Markman.

Rumors of the job cuts have been swirling for months. With a declining subscriber base (ESPN has lost more than 1 million subs since January, according to Nielsen) and increased rights fees (ESPN’s new multi-billion dollar deal for the NBA started last fall), ESPN needed to make budget cuts. A year and a half ago, ESPN laid off around 300 employees for many of the same reasons. Back then, the names were not well known to most of ESPN viewers. Today’s cuts will include names that viewers know well.

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Morning-Buzz/2017/04/26/ESPN-cuts.aspx
 

Clears Cleaver

Lil' Bill
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
11,370
ESPN has taken a lot of criticism for moving politically to the left. And for moving away from sports and to pop culture and hot takes. It will be interesting to see what direction these layoffs go in terms of hosts
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,513
If you think Ed Werder has the same impact on ratings as those two, or any impact for that matter, I don't know what to tell you.

I don't give a shit. Anyone could give hot takes as bad as SAS/ Skip Baylee's for half of what they pay them.. You can't say the same for the quality of work that Werder has done. One is easily replaceable while the other isn't.
 

PaulinMyrBch

Don't touch his dog food
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2003
8,316
MYRTLE BEACH!!!!
These are odd days inside of a building if anyone has ever gone through a corporate slaughter day like today. Just an eerie feeling with co-workers all day. You never feel like it is over, just that you made it through round 1, or 2, or whatever. Once you see corporate is capable of this, you never feel safe. Completely understandable for a public company, but its an odd feeling at the workplace.
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,157
Tuukka's refugee camp
I don't give a shit. Anyone could give hot takes as bad as SAS/ Skip Baylee's for half of what they pay them.. You can't say the same for the quality of work that Werder has done. One is easily replaceable while the other isn't.
And that's why you don't run ESPN. ESPN cares about eyeballs because eyeballs means money. Nobody cares if Schefter, Werder, Rappaport, or whomever gets a scoop anymore and they're certainly not watching Sportscenter for Ed Werder.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,614
Any higher-ups going? You know...the people responsible for the decisions and/or lack of foresight that created this mess?

Ultimately, given the absolute rancid shit (other than actual live sports) that passes for "programming," they should just put a salary cap on all employees and just hire young cheap good-looking men and women to scream at each other while offering uninformed hot takes. Saves lots of money, while not diluting the product, since what they offer outside of live sports is beyond dilution. Its got the substance of the final pre-colonoscopy BM.
 
Last edited:

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,910
Maine
Was there any question that the folks getting the ax were going to be the true "beat" reporters? They're the ones doing the unglamorous, at-best-ratings-neutral stuff that are only appreciated by hardcore sports fans. The corporate folks look at these 10-15+ year vets who are making fair salaries for their experience and think they can be replaced by cheap, fresh out of college kids whose only advantage is they're far better using social media.
 

PaulinMyrBch

Don't touch his dog food
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2003
8,316
MYRTLE BEACH!!!!
The business has changed. When the Romo news broke a few weeks ago, I was on the way to the gym listening to Mike/Mike in my car. Greenberg teases the news "we have breaking news from Adam Shefter regarding Tony Romo as soon as we return from the break...". I switch to NFL network and immediately check twitter. Never returned to the channel again. 15 years ago the tease works and I probably sit in my car in the parking lot until I have the info. Today I get it in literally seconds. If they don't understand the changing landscape of sports news, its on them. They pretty much invented it.
 

Rusty13

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 3, 2007
5,378

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
The only thing worse than doing this once is doing it twice. I expect it to be a bloodbath.

And absent a brand new guy or gal at the VERY top, which is not the case here, no, the people at the helm business wise are not going to pay. They will protect each other.

And, no, Greenie at $6.5 per is not going to save them. But he is smart enough to know this and save his money.
 

Ale Xander

Hamilton
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
73,235
Please tell me Trent Dilfer, and Jemele Hill are among the cuts? Then I'd feel little better about the rest of them (Lebrun, Joey Mac, Werder, Dana) gone and people like Ravech getting their roles reduced.

I really don't understand ESPN's evaluation of talent.

They really need to bring back Charissa and bring in Katie.


Edit: thanks lose
Must have been my nightmares acting up again
 
Last edited:

Rusty13

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 3, 2007
5,378
Please tell me Ray Lewis, Trent Dilfer, and Jemele Hill are among the cuts? Then I'd feel little better about the rest of them (Lebrun, Joey Mac, Werder, Dana)

I really don't understand ESPN's evaluation of talent.

They really need to bring back Charissa and bring in Katie.
I pretty much guarantee Jemele Hill is going NOWHERE. She has become one of the "faces" of the network right now, and they have gone all in with her and Michael Smith on the 6 p.m. "Sports" Center broadcast.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Please tell me Ray Lewis, Trent Dilfer, and Jemele Hill are among the cuts? Then I'd feel little better about the rest of them (Lebrun, Joey Mac, Werder, Dana) gone and people like Ravech getting their roles reduced.

I really don't understand ESPN's evaluation of talent.

They really need to bring back Charissa and bring in Katie.
Wasn't Ray already gone? Not that we can't celebrate that again
 

B H Kim

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 24, 2003
5,734
Washington, DC
I think the message is pretty clear. ESPN is getting out of, or at least de-emphasizing, actual news gathering in favor of "entertaining" on-air content.
 

NYCSox

chris hansen of goats
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 19, 2004
10,490
Some fancy town in CT
I pretty much guarantee Jemele Hill is going NOWHERE. She has become one of the "faces" of the network right now, and they have gone all in with her and Michael Smith on the 6 p.m. "Sports" Center broadcast.
Personally, I'm all for going all in with a 2/7 off-suit.
 

Vinho Tinto

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 9, 2003
7,070
Auburn, MA
The calls to layoff Hill and Smith are asnine. They just spent a nice chunk of change to promote their new 6PM SportsCenter. They each received new contracts. They're not going to pay them to play golf or tweet for the duration of their deals.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,614
I think the message is pretty clear. ESPN is getting out of, or at least de-emphasizing, actual news gathering in favor of "entertaining" on-air content.
ESPN kind of following the MTV playbook where the main programming (music videos/sports events & coverage) got phased out for other programming. it's gone so well for MTV:


MTV, too, has also seen trouble. The network's audience dropped by almost 50% in the lucrative 18-49 demographic (an age category that is particularly important to MTV) since 2011. During the same time period, the network slipped from the number eight ad-supported cable network to number 20.
Forbes
 

PaulinMyrBch

Don't touch his dog food
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2003
8,316
MYRTLE BEACH!!!!
When I'm looking for info on a breaking story, I go to twitter or I come here. I tune in to games literally at kickoff if they are on ESPN, or anywhere really. I avoid their non-live content like the plague. While I like some of the people supporting broadcasts, they are normally telling me stuff I/we already know if we're looking at our phones. It's a different business.
 

CarolinaBeerGuy

Don't know him from Adam
SoSH Member
Mar 14, 2006
9,907
Kernersville, NC
When I'm looking for info on a breaking story, I go to twitter or I come here. I tune in to games literally at kickoff if they are on ESPN, or anywhere really. I avoid their non-live content like the plague. While I like some of the people supporting broadcasts, they are normally telling me stuff I/we already know if we're looking at our phones. It's a different business.
Same here. I never watch any of their flagships anymore.
 

Vinho Tinto

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 9, 2003
7,070
Auburn, MA
ESPN kind of following the MTV playbook where the main programming (music videos/sports events & coverage) got phased out for other programming. it's gone so well for MTV:
I read a book on the history of MTV about 10 years ago. The book referenced that by the late 80s they knew they had to change because they did not make one dime playing videos. When MTV began the shift with Remote Control and the Real World, it was like throwing spaghetti on a wall to see if something stuck before they shut off the lights.

That's not ESPN's problem. Their problem is that they've gone from printing money to losing subs. This all happened during a time when they have loaded up on massive guaranteed broadcasting contracts. ESPN has finally reached a point where it cannot pass all of those costs thru to tv providers/customers.

The interesting thing going forward is that we have never seen a decline in television contracts for major sports, but logic says that it should happen. I guess in theory, the leagues could tell their broadcast partners that they don't care that they are losing money on what they are selling them - just make sure their next bid is higher than the last.
 

Rusty13

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 3, 2007
5,378
The interesting thing going forward is that we have never seen a decline in television contracts for major sports, but logic says that it should happen. I guess in theory, the leagues could tell their broadcast partners that they don't care that they are losing money on what they are selling them - just make sure their next bid is higher than the last.
This is what is holding the dam together. When the bidding prices from networks start plummeting and the market for a la carte/streaming for live sports becomes more viable, the full implosion will occur. Same thing applies to cable news, although I think they have more of a shelf life than sports networks.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,910
Maine
Don't they still have the TV rights to the NCAA hockey tournament? Buccigross is their main guy for that.
They've got a year to pick someone else to do it. They might as well go full bore with their lackluster coverage of the tournament by removing the one (prominent) guy in their ranks who had genuine enthusiasm for it.